CA8: Supervised release term of “random inspections of his computer’s internet and email usage history” reasonably justified search of def’s computer

Supervised release term of “random inspections of his computer’s internet and email usage history” reasonably justified search of defendant’s computer. United States v. McCoy, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 1695 (8th Cir. Jan. 31, 2017):

McCoy says: “He was not subject to warrantless searches as a condition of release.” To the contrary, the conditions of release say:

[H]e will be subject to random inspections of his computer’s internet and email usage history by the Pre-Trial Services Officer assigned to his case, in order to ensure compliance with the parameters of these conditions.

McCoy’s conditions of release, which he proposed, expressly authorized the search. See Samson v. California, 547 U.S. 843, 846 (2006) (holding the government may conduct warrantless, suspicionless searches of parolees).

Also without merit is McCoy’s assertion that the search “went well beyond the conditions of release to inspect not only internet or email, but extensive user files.” As Officer Garrett testified, it is impossible to evaluate Internet activity based solely on web-browser history. Because “[t]here is no one central repository for Internet artifacts on a computer hard drive and the Windows operating system,” a broader examination was necessary.

The search and seizure were reasonable. “When an officer has reasonable suspicion that a probationer subject to a search condition is engaged in criminal activity, there is enough likelihood that criminal conduct is occurring that an intrusion on the probationer’s significantly diminished privacy interests is reasonable.” United States v. Knights, 534 U.S. 112, 121 (2001). Determining reasonable suspicion, a probation officer may consider “the detail and consistency of the information suggesting the presence of contraband … [i]nformation provided by the [probationer] which is relevant to whether the [probationer] possesses contraband … [and] [t]he experience of a staff member with that [probationer] or in a similar circumstance.” Griffin v. Wisconsin, 483 U.S. 868, 878-79 (1987) (internal quotations and citations omitted). Officers had reasonable suspicion to seize and search McCoy’s computer equipment based on his: (1) prior criminal history; (2) computer sophistication; (3) unusually large number of electronic storage devices; (4) sophisticated RAID array; and (5) statements about erasing pornography from his computers.