IL: Probation agreement permitted suspicionless computer searches

Defendant’s probation agreement validly agreed to submit only his computer to suspicionless searches. He retained an expectation of privacy in his house. People v. Thornburg, 2008 Ill. App. LEXIS 814 (August 12, 2008), released for publication September 26, 2008).*

Additional motion to suppress denied without a hearing for defendant not showing a factual dispute that he had an expectation of privacy in the place searched. This was a separate challenge to one heard by the USMJ. United States v. Troya, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76995 (S.D. Fla. October 2, 2008) (“‘[A] motion to suppress must in every critical respect, including allegations of standing, be “sufficiently definite, specific, detailed, and nonconjectural to enable the court to conclude that a substantial claim is presented.”‘”).

Defendant was not in custody at the scene of an accident when he made admissions to the officer that led to his arrest. Turner v. State, 12 So. 3d 1 (Miss. App. 2008).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.