On appeal from the denial of a motion to suppress, how do we review the findings of law de novo?

On appeal from the denial of a motion to suppress, we review the district court's "conclusions of law de novo and its factual findings for clear error, viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the government." United States v. Ramos, 685 F.3d 120, 128 (2d Cir. 2012). A judge who determines whether there is probable cause to

Page 11

issue a warrant "make[s] a practical, common-sense decision whether, given all of the circumstances set forth in the affidavit . . . there is a fair probability that contraband or evidence of a crime will be found in a particular place." Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213, 238 (1983). Because the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule is intended to deter "intentional conduct that [is] patently unconstitutional," evidence seized by officers who carried out a warrant that issued without probable cause need not be excluded if those officers relied on the warrant in good faith. Herring v. United States, 555 U.S. 135, 143-44 (2009).