With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". “there is a fair probability that ... evidence of a crime will be found in a particular place.” Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213, 238, 103 S.Ct. 2317, 76 L.Ed.2d 527 (1983). This court determines only whether the issuing judge “had a substantial basis [to conclude] that probable cause existed.” Id. at 238-39, 103 S.Ct. 2317 (internal quotation marks omitted). Morgan argues that the information in the search warrant was stale, and thus the warrant lacked probable cause, because police did not apply for the warrant until 75 days after identifying his IP address and 51 days after associating it with him. Periods much longer than 75 or 51 days have not rendered information stale in computer-based child-pornography cases. See, e.g., United States v. Estey, 595 F.3d 836, 840 (8th Cir. 2010) (<HOLDING>). The affidavit in support of the search

A: holding a fivemonth delay in searching a computer did not invalidate the search because there was no showing that the delay caused a lapse in probable cause that it created prejudice to the defendant or that officers acted in bad faith
B: holding that a fivemonth delay in filing a motion to disqualify did not bar the motion where there was a reasonable explanation for the delay
C: holding that apprendi did not render  841 unconstitutional
D: holding that a fivemonth delay did not render information stale
D.