CA11: Search of briefcase of arrested internet predator was justified by inventory

Defendant’s consent to search his laptop computer after he was arrested at the Atlanta airport for traveling interstate for sex with a minor in an internet sting case came after he knew what was under investigation and he was told of his right to refuse. The seizure of his briefcase and the subsequent search of it was valid at least as an inventory. United States v. Farley, 607 F.3d 1294 (11th Cir. 2010).* This is an interesting (and long: 112 pages long) opinion raising a huge number of issues, including that fact there was no minor therefore no crime (he lost), and an aside by the court about the defendant wondering seven times in the chat sessions whether this was a sting operation:

As Farley had suspected out loud to “Stephanie” on seven different occasions, it was a sting operation. Still, he had single-mindedly pursued his “dream.”FN4

4 Farley’s damn-the-suspicions-and-full-speed-ahead recklessness is not unusual with sex predators who prey on children.

What follows is a quote from Louis Freeh’s biography.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.