Officers had a court order under Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code \u00a7 8100 for taking plaintiff\u2019s guns because of a mental health hold. They came to his house but he was gone. They talked to him through his Ring doorbell. His therapist made the call that started it. They got the guns from him. Case over the guns dismissed. Hill v. L.A. Cty. Sheriff’s Dep’t, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31135 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 11, 2026).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThe warrant limits the digital search to electronic devices and files \u2018constituting evidence of sexual exploitation of children,\u2019 not a full forensic search of every device and file as Mr. Quinlan asserts. Although the warrant lacks a temporal limitation, the constituting evidence of language distinguishes this warrant from the Galpin warrant found to lack particularity for failure to \u2018provid[e] the forensic examiner with any guidance or limitations as to what kinds of files might be relevant.\u2019 \u2026 Although the language of the warrant issued here could have been drafted more artfully, the court finds the limiting language sufficiently connects the items to be seized to the crime of sexual exploitation of children.\u201d United States v. Quinlan, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30725 (D. Vt. Feb. 13, 2026).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Officers had a court order under Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code \u00a7 8100 for taking plaintiff\u2019s guns because of a mental health hold. They came to his house but he was gone. They talked to him through his Ring doorbell. … Continue reading