E.D.Va.: The gov’t had individualized suspicion for a forensic border search of def’s cell phone

The post-arrest, off-site forensic search of defendant’s phone was instead a border search, which did not require a warrant supported by probable cause. The first search of defendant’s phone conducted at the airport was a routine border search that did not require individualized suspicion. Although the first manual search of defendant’s phone conducted at the airport was a routine border search, the subsequent forensic search of defendant’s phone conducted at the Homeland Security Investigations’ office in Sterling, Virginia was a nonroutine border search requiring some level of individualized suspicion. Here, the government had more than reasonable suspicion that defendant was attempting to export weapons parts listed on the United States Munitions List without a license, in violation of the Arms Export Control Act. United States v. Kolsuz, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60538 (E.D.Va. May 5, 2016).*