On appeal defendant conceded the lawfulness of the seizure of his iPhone. Army investigators allegedly illegally seized a computer as well. All the trial court litigation never raised the question of the use of the computer, too, so that’s waived. Even if not waived, there’s sufficient evidence of good faith reliance on a search authorization to affirm on an alternative ground, too. United States v. Smith, 2018 CCA LEXIS 108 (Army Ct. Crim. App. Mar. 6, 2018).
“First, we find appellant’s wife lawfully authorized the search of appellant’s cellphone. Second, we hold the military judge did not abuse his discretion in determining appellant’s request that his cellphone be returned did not amount to withdrawal of consent to search based on the totality of the circumstances. Third, we find, even if consent had been withdrawn, the inevitable discovery doctrine would apply. We therefore affirm.” United States v. Eugene, 2018 CCA LEXIS 106 (Army Ct. Crim. App. Mar. 6, 2018) (unpublished).*