Child porn search warrant did not permit search of a box for non-child porn evidence

Affidavit for search of computer for child porn was sufficient where it alleged nonsexual pictures of a young woman along with defendant’s acts toward her which showed a fair probability that child porn would be found. “[A] search warrant for child pornography stored on a computer need not be restricted to the images that authorities have already seen or know to exist.” The search warrant was overbroad as to some things not child porn since probable cause was lacking as to them. United States v. Ogden, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42216 (W.D. Tenn. May 28, 2008).*

Plaintiff’s rights as a father were not violated by an alleged Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment violation against his son who was put into foster care when the mother was found to have tested positive for methamphetamine. McHugh v. Ind. Family & Soc. Servs. Admin., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42268 (S.D. Ind. May 27, 2008).*

Fellow officer rule applies between DEA with PC and a local officer when they had PC to stop and search defendant’s car based on a CI’s statement. Even if there was no probable cause, there was at least reasonable suspicion, and the rest lawfully followed. United States v. Sellers, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42260 (N.D. Ind. May 20, 2008).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.