Federal appellate cases received today

Defendant was in the premises of a third person, and police had an arrest warrrant for him. The entry was valid under Steagald, and it is illogical to grant the defendant more standing than he would be entitled under Payton. RS that the person named in the warrant is required, not PC. “[T]he Government argues that while a circuit-split does exist, a majority of the circuits that have ruled on the issue have determined that a lesser reasonable belief standard, and not probable cause, is sufficient to allow officers to enter a residence to enforce an arrest warrant, and that the officers here had adequate information in this case to meet this standard. We agree.” United States v. Pruitt, 458 F.3d 477 (6th Cir. August 11, 2006).

Habeas and procedural default: Changing the issue between the trial court and the appeals court constitutes procedural default for habeas purposes. Simpson v. Battaglia, 458 F.3d 585 (7th Cir. August 11, 2006).

SW for seizure of all computer media was not overbroad under the facts of this case. United States v. Hill, 459 F.3d 966 (9th Cir. August 11, 2006).

We agree with the district court that under the circumstances here, the warrant was not fatally defective in failing to require an onsite search and isolation of child pornography before removing storage media wholesale. That does not mean, however, that the government has an automatic blank check when seeking or executing warrants in computer-related searches. Although computer technology may in theory justify blanket seizures for the reasons discussed above, the government must still demonstrate to the magistrate factually why such a broad search and seizure authority is reasonable in the case at hand. There may well be situations where the government has no basis for believing that a computer search would involve the kind of technological problems that would make an immediate onsite search and selective removal of relevant evidence impracticable. Thus, there must be some threshold showing before the government may “seize the haystack to look for the needle.”

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.