The return of the search warrant materials was late, but defendant shows no prejudice, and he had them in discovery. United States v. Lesane, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137777 (S.D.N.Y. July 23, 2021).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant\u2019s discovery claim that the government must have installed malware on his computer in violation of the Fourth Amendment to discover his IP is purely speculative and doesn\u2019t merit relief. United States v. Bateman, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 135091 (D. Mass. July 20, 2021)<\/p>\n\n\n\n
State\u2019s attorney\u2019s subpoena duces tecum for materials for trial preparation returnable in court and pursuant to state statute was not a violation of the Fourth Amendment. Subpoena Duces Tecum v. Reardon, 2021 Ill. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1232 (July 22, 2021) (unpublished).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The consenter had actual or apparent authority to consent, and defendant didn\u2019t contest that assertion. He had joint access and control. United States v. McDonald, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137653 (C.D.Ill. July 23, 2021).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The return of the search warrant materials was late, but defendant shows no prejudice, and he had them in discovery. United States v. Lesane, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137777 (S.D.N.Y. July 23, 2021). Defendant\u2019s discovery claim that the government must … Continue reading