D.Nev.: This digital search warrant was as precise as it could be; “the nature of digital information is different from other searchable items”

Defendant’s daughter used the family computer to search for music files, and she found a picture of her naked torso. She looked further and found child pornography. She printed it out and gave it to a friend for safekeeping. A search warrant was properly issued for the computer, and defendant’s Franks challenge fails because it didn’t matter on the probable cause question. The search was proper in scope for digital information. United States v. Jones, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73369 (D. Nev. April 13, 2011)*:

Furthermore, the nature of digital information is different from other searchable items. The warrant affidavit explains:

As is the case with most digital technology, communications by way of computer can be saved or stored on the computer used for these purposes. Storing this information can be intentional, i.e., by saving an email as a file on the computer or saving the location of ones’ favorite website(s) in, for example, “bookmarks” files. Digital information can also be retained unintentionally, e.g., traces of the path on an electronic communication may be automatically stored in many places.

Computer hard drives and other removable storage media … are convenient items in which digital information can be stored for later retrieval.

Affidavit to Warrant at 7 ¶¶ 4, 5, Attached as Exhibit A to Defendant’s Motion (#24). In this context, the warrant was as precise as it could be in relation to searching for evidence of child pornography and child pornography related chats.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.