The search warrant was for a multitude of things in defendant’s house, including cell phones and clothing worn during the crime. A clothes pile could be searched without first determining whose clothes were apparently there. The pockets could be searched, too. State v. Workman, 2017-Ohio-2802, 2017 Ohio App. LEXIS 1838 (12th Dist. May 15, 2017).
Defendant wrote to the court 13 months after his guilty plea expressing regret for cooperating. He wanted to challenge the search by a motion to suppress. Denied: Defendant’s letter is no more than regret in cooperating and doesn’t show grounds to overturn the plea for manufacturing child pornography. United States v. Lander, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72384 (W.D. N.Y. May 11, 2017).*