CA1: Consent to search for letters, some composed on computer, permitted search of briefcase and desk as well as computer

Defendant’s consent to search his apartment in a stalking investigation was general. “Furthermore, the form referred generally to ‘letters, papers, or other property.’ This boilerplate language, unmodified, indicates an intention to go well beyond a mere computer search.” He contended that he thought they were looking for letters to the stalking victim. Cash in a briefcase and desk drawer and business records showing defendant sold used computer equipment under a pseudonym was used to prosecute him for tax evasion, and they were within the scope of consent. United States v. Stierhoff, 549 F.3d 19 (1st Cir. 2008).* (Comment: There was a significant claim of waiver that the defendant changed the argument from the District Court and the Court of Appeals. The court here dealt with the issue on the merits.)

Officers had reasonable suspicion to stop defendant and have him lie on the ground for a patdown when he was seen fleeing the scene of an unannounced visit of a defendant on home detention. United States v. Carlisle, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98075 (N.D. Ind. December 3, 2008).*

Baseless plaintiff’s motion to remand in a civil rights case removed to federal court that was clearly barred by Heck results in show cause order for Rule 11 sanctions against plaintiff. King v. Farris, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98044 (M.D. Ga. December 3, 2008).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.