Did the Eighth Circuit erroneously rule, in conflict with this Court's decision in Illinois v. Gates, that the search warrant for a Chrysler vehicle alleged to be associated with Petitioner stated probable cause?

QUESTION PRESENTED Did the Eighth Circuit erroneously rule, in conflict with this Court’s decision in J/linois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (1983), that the searchwarrant for a Chrysler vehicle alleged to be associated with Petitioner stated probable cause, where the supporting affidavit, by a straw affiant, contains no facts making it probable that vehicle currently contained drug-related evidence, owing to the cited confidential informants not being shown to have current, reliable information, the affidavit relying on stale information from a prior, unexecuted search warrant, and the affidavit not making it probable that the Chrysler would even be in the County where the warrant had to be executed, and where earlier-issued the GPS tracking-warrants for other vehicles allegedly associated with Petitioner had similar and basis-of-knowledge defects, and the Chrysler warrant included information from two of those warrants?