Defendant was being held on a murder charge, and he made a jail call to his parents to have his computer hard drive wiped clean. Hearing that, police obtained a search warrant for the computer believing that it might have evidence tying defendant to the murder. Instead, they found child pornography. The computer warrant was necessarily broad, but broad doesn’t mean that it’s per se unconstitutional. The USMJ recommended suppressing in part but the USDJ disagrees. Also important is the fact that the USMJ didn’t say how the warrant could have been narrowed more. The motion to suppress is denied. United States v. Cobb, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174207 (N.D. W.Va. Oct. 10, 2018):
Magistrate Judge Aloi concluded that this warrant lacked the requisite particularity because it allowed Sergeant Alkire to search the contents of Cobb’s laptop computer in their entirety (Dkt. No. 36 at 16-18). But the need to review the contents of Cobb’s laptop in order to determine which files were authorized for seizure does not make the warrant unconstitutionally overbroad.
Indeed, “[w]hen a search requires review of a large collection of items, such as papers, ‘it is certain that some innocuous documents will be examined, at least cursorily, in order to determine whether they are, in fact, among those papers authorized to be seized.'” United States v. Williams, 592 F.3d 511, 519-20 (4th Cir. 2010) (quoting Andresen, 427 U.S. at 482 n.11). Computers are no different: “[T]he sheer amount of information contained on a computer does not distinguish the authorized search of the computer from an analogous search of a file cabinet containing a large number of documents.” Id. at 523.
Nor is Williams strictly limited to crimes that require the use of a computer. See, e.g., United States v. Patterson, No. 2:17cr114, 2017 WL 5889744, at *4 (E.D. Va. Nov. 29, 2017) (holding search of computer hard drives did not exceed scope of warrant to search for evidence of various firearm offenses). What matters is whether, as here, there is probable cause to believe evidence of a crime will be found on the computer. See, e.g., United States v. Bradley, No. 5:16-cr-8, 2017 WL 1133510, at *5 n.8 (W.D. Va. Mar. 24, 2017) (recognizing evidence of money laundering found in plain view on computer would be admissible under Williams when officers had probable cause to search email for evidence of drug crimes).
Although the second warrant could have been more specific, “[m]ore specificity is not required by the Constitution.” Dickerson, 166 F.3d at 694 (alteration in original) (quoting Ladd, 704 F.2d at 136). In the R&R, Magistrate Judge Aloi reasoned that the second warrant was not sufficiently particular because the investigating officers could have been more specific under the circumstances (Dkt. No. 36 at 20). For example, he suggests that the executing officers should have included information to indicate that they would search for evidence of motive and premeditation, including the conflicting motives that Cobb’s parents previously had reported. Id.
Tellingly, the R&R does not explain how any of this information would have further limited the scope of the second warrant. Id. at 21. Specifying that the officers would search for and seize evidence of Cobb’s motive and premeditation would not have further limited a warrant already limited to searching for and seizing evidence of first-degree murder—which necessarily includes evidence of motive and premeditation.
by John Wesley Hall
Criminal Defense Lawyer and
Search and seizure law consultant
Little Rock, Arkansas
Contact: forhall @ aol.com / The Book www.johnwesleyhall.com
"If it was easy, everybody would be doing it. It isn't, and they don't." —Me
"Life is not a matter of holding good cards, but of playing a poor hand well." –Josh Billings (pseudonym of Henry Wheeler Shaw), Josh Billings on Ice, and Other Things (1868) (erroneously attributed to Robert Louis Stevenson, among others)
“I am still learning.” —Domenico Giuntalodi (but misattributed to Michelangelo Buonarroti (common phrase throughout 1500's)).
"Love work; hate mastery over others; and avoid intimacy with the government."
—Shemaya, in the Thalmud
"It is a pleasant world we live in, sir, a very pleasant world. There are bad people in it, Mr. Richard, but if there were no bad people, there would be no good lawyers."
—Charles Dickens, “The Old Curiosity Shop ... With a Frontispiece. From a Painting by Geo. Cattermole, Etc.” 255 (1848)
"A system of law that not only makes certain conduct criminal, but also lays down rules for the conduct of the authorities, often becomes complex in its application to individual cases, and will from time to time produce imperfect results, especially if one's attention is confined to the particular case at bar. Some criminals do go free because of the necessity of keeping government and its servants in their place. That is one of the costs of having and enforcing a Bill of Rights. This country is built on the assumption that the cost is worth paying, and that in the long run we are all both freer and safer if the Constitution is strictly enforced."
—Williams
v. Nix, 700 F. 2d 1164, 1173 (8th Cir. 1983) (Richard Sheppard Arnold,
J.), rev'd Nix v. Williams, 467 US. 431 (1984).
"The criminal goes free, if he must, but it is the law that sets him free. Nothing can destroy a government more quickly than its failure to observe its own laws,
or worse, its disregard of the charter of its own existence." —Mapp
v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 659 (1961).
"Any costs the exclusionary rule are costs imposed directly by the Fourth Amendment."
—Yale Kamisar, 86 Mich.L.Rev. 1, 36 n. 151 (1987).
"There have been powerful hydraulic pressures throughout our history that
bear heavily on the Court to water down constitutional guarantees and give the
police the upper hand. That hydraulic pressure has probably never been greater
than it is today."
— Terry
v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 39 (1968) (Douglas, J., dissenting).
"The great end, for which men entered into society, was to secure their
property."
—Entick
v. Carrington, 19 How.St.Tr. 1029, 1066, 95 Eng. Rep. 807 (C.P. 1765)
"It is a fair summary of history to say that the safeguards of liberty have
frequently been forged in controversies involving not very nice people. And
so, while we are concerned here with a shabby defrauder, we must deal with his
case in the context of what are really the great themes expressed by the Fourth
Amendment."
—United
States v. Rabinowitz, 339 U.S. 56, 69 (1950) (Frankfurter, J., dissenting)
"The course of true law pertaining to searches and seizures, as enunciated
here, has not–to put it mildly–run smooth."
—Chapman
v. United States, 365 U.S. 610, 618 (1961) (Frankfurter, J., concurring).
"A search is a search, even if it happens to disclose nothing but the
bottom of a turntable."
—Arizona
v. Hicks, 480 U.S. 321, 325 (1987)
"For the Fourth Amendment protects people, not places. What a person knowingly
exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not a subject of Fourth
Amendment protection. ... But what he seeks to preserve as private, even in
an area accessible to the public, may be constitutionally protected."
—Katz
v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 351 (1967)
“Experience should teach us to be most on guard to
protect liberty when the Government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born
to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded
rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men
of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.”
—United
States v. Olmstead, 277 U.S. 438, 479 (1925) (Brandeis, J., dissenting)
“Liberty—the freedom from unwarranted
intrusion by government—is as easily lost through insistent nibbles by
government officials who seek to do their jobs too well as by those whose purpose
it is to oppress; the piranha can be as deadly as the shark.”
—United
States v. $124,570, 873 F.2d 1240, 1246 (9th Cir. 1989)
"You can't always get what you want /
But if you try sometimes / You just might find / You get what you need."
—Mick Jagger & Keith Richards
"In Germany, they first came for the communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for
the Catholics and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Catholic. Then they came
for me–and by that time there was nobody left to speak up."
—Martin Niemöller (1945) [he served seven years in a concentration
camp]
“You know, most men would get discouraged by
now. Fortunately for you, I am not most men!”
---Pepé Le Pew
"The point of the Fourth Amendment, which often is not grasped by zealous officers,
is not that it denies law enforcement the support of the usual inferences which
reasonable men draw from evidence. Its protection consists in requiring that
those inferences be drawn by a neutral and detached magistrate instead of being
judged by the officer engaged in the often competitive enterprise of ferreting
out crime."
—Johnson
v. United States, 333 U.S. 10, 13-14 (1948)