the Cl’s description and location of Pruett’s residence by driving to the residence based on the Cl’s directions; (4) he took pictures of the blue truck at the residence; (5) he spoke to Harrison County personnel about Pruett prior to applying for the warrant; and (6) he knew from personal experience that Pruett drove a blue Chevrolet pickup truck. Pruett notes that the warrant application contained errors, including the misspelling of his last name (as “Pruitt”) and the incorrect location of his house (stating that the house was on the west side, rather than the east side, of the street). These minor clerical errors, however, do not undermine the reasonableness of the officers’ reliance on the validity of the warrant. See United States v. Thomas, 263 F.3d 805, 808-09 (8th Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 1146, 122 S.Ct. 1104,
holding that an affidavit did not provide probable cause sufficient to validate a warrant where the affidavit stated an incorrect date uncontradicted by any other specific fact in the affidavit holding that if sufficient untainted evidence was presented in the warrant affidavit to establish probable cause the warrant was nevertheless valid holding that the presence of the correct address in the sworn affidavit could correct a typographical error in the warrant holding warrant valid where search warrant application affidavit was signed and probable cause existed for issuance of warrant holding the leon exception applicable where the ad dress on the warrant was different from the address in the affidavit