{"id":6526,"date":"2012-05-02T07:30:19","date_gmt":"2012-01-11T08:09:39","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2012-01-11T08:09:39","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=6526","title":{"rendered":"CA9: Child porn supervised release condition of searches of computers connected to internet valid"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>In a child porn case, it was hardly an abuse of discretion to condition supervised release on searches of computers connected to the internet. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.ca9.uscourts.gov\/datastore\/memoranda\/2012\/01\/09\/10-50094.pdf\">United States v. Grigsby<\/a>, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 412 (9th Cir. January 9, 2012) (unpublished): <\/p>\n<blockquote><p>The district court did not abuse its discretion by imposing a condition of supervised release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. \u00a7 3583(d) requiring that Grigsby submit to searches and seizures of computers and related devices. \u201cSubjecting computers and other devices able to access the Internet to monitoring, search and seizure is critical to preventing [Grigsby] from viewing or obtaining child pornography.\u201d <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=9632835175840056997&amp;q=537+F.3d+1087&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,37\">United States v. Goddard<\/a>, 537 F.3d 1087, 1090 (9th Cir. 2008). This condition of supervised release is sufficiently narrow because it applies only to those devices connected to the Internet. See <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=9037300008222226412&amp;q=643+F.3d+1266&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,37\">United States v. Quinzon<\/a>, 643 F.3d 1266, 1272-74 (9th Cir. 2011) (analyzing an identically-worded condition of supervised release).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The encounter with defendant was voluntary and consensual, but there was more because defendant fit the description of a person in a conversion van whom a BBQ joint\u2019s employees thought was casing the place to rob it. When the officer saw the van and the defendant he was the only person around and he was acting suspiciously. Finally, he fled when the questions got more pointed. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.ca11.uscourts.gov\/unpub\/ops\/201015221.pdf\">United States v. Foskey<\/a>, 455 Fed. Appx. 884 (11th Cir. 2012).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>b2evALnk.b2WPAutP <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=6526\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"pingsdone","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-6526","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6526","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=6526"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6526\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=6526"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=6526"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=6526"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}