The government\u2019s use of specialized software to search peer-to-peer files didn\u2019t create a reasonable expectation of privacy claim. \u201cRoundUp, software with certain technological modifications to a public, open-source P2P network sharing client, is designed to access public files that individuals affirmatively place into the public sphere. Defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy in the files he chose to upload to his eMule \u2018shared\u2019 folder for public download. Accordingly, the government’s use of RoundUp to access his public files did not constitute a Fourth Amendment \u2018search.\u2019\u201d United States v. Arumugam, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41563 (W.D. Wash. Mar. 10, 2020).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In an overprescribing case, defendant doctor challenged the search warrant of his practice claiming a Franks violation. Applications for warrants are seldom perfect. Here it included statements that his patients died after his treatment ended with no showing of context that the end of treatment was the cause, not the treatment. The question is probable cause, not certitude. United States v. Houdersheldt, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41334 (S.D. W.Va. Mar. 10, 2020).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The government\u2019s use of specialized software to search peer-to-peer files didn\u2019t create a reasonable expectation of privacy claim. \u201cRoundUp, software with certain technological modifications to a public, open-source P2P network sharing client, is designed to access public files that individuals … Continue reading