
    UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Charles Mark FILES, Appellant.
    No. 05-2691.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted Feb. 21, 2006.
    Filed Feb. 27, 2006.
    Kevin T. Alexander, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Little Rock, AR, for Appellee.
    Charles Mark Files, Brinkley, AR, pro se.
    Jerry Jon Sailings, Wright & Lindsey, Little Rock, AR, for Appellant.
    Before MURPHY, HANSEN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

After the district court denied his motion to suppress evidence seized from his home pursuant to a search warrant, Charles Mark Files conditionally pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribute and possess with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. The district court sentenced him to 120 months in prison and 3 years of supervised release. On appeal, he challenges the denial of his motion to suppress. For the reasons discussed below, we affirm.

Having reviewed the district court’s factual findings for clear error and its legal conclusions de novo, see United States v. Williams, 431 F.3d 1115, 1117 (8th Cir. 2005), we conclude that the district court did not err in denying Files’s suppression motion. The affidavit submitted in support of the search warrant application did not violate Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154, 98 S.Ct. 2674, 57 L.Ed.2d 667 (1978), and the affidavit established probable cause because it sufficiently corroborated the information that informants had provided to police, the information it contained was not stale, and it adequately connected Files’s criminal activity outside his home to a reasonable belief that contraband would be found inside his home.

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. 
      
      . The Honorable George Howard, Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
     