{"id":58951,"date":"2024-09-26T08:14:11","date_gmt":"2024-09-26T13:14:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=58951"},"modified":"2024-09-26T08:32:16","modified_gmt":"2024-09-26T13:32:16","slug":"d-d-c-even-if-electronic-search-protocol-is-a-constl-requirement-gfe-applies","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=58951","title":{"rendered":"D.D.C.: Even if electronic search protocol is a const’l requirement, GFE applies"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The lack of an electronics search protocol in the warrant, even if it was constitutionally required, doesn\u2019t even have to be decided because of the good faith exception. \u201cOkafor suggests that the Constitution might nonetheless demand that a warrant specify a search protocol when it authorizes a search of electronic media. The Court need not decide this question because, regardless, the warrants were executed in objective good faith. Under the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule, \u2018evidence seized in reasonable, good-faith reliance on a search warrant\u2019 need not be excluded, even if the warrant is found lacking. \u2026 And \u2018the fact that a neutral magistrate has issued a warrant is the clearest indication\u2019 that the officers acted in good faith. \u2026\u201d United States v. Okafor<\/a>, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 170895 (D.D.C. Sep. 23, 2024).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Warrantless entry to obviate the opportunity to destroy evidence isn\u2019t a reason to suppress. Segura v. United States, 468 U.S. 796, 813-16 (1984). \u201cIn Segura, the Supreme Court considered this idea in the context of a case where residents of a home could have had an opportunity to destroy evidence, but for the warrantless entry of police officers. Id. The Supreme Court noted that the \u2018suggestion that [the defendant] and her cohorts would have removed or destroyed the evidence was pure speculation.\u201d Id. at 816. \u2026 In closing, the Court rejected the concept of \u2018some \u201cconstitutional right\u201d to destroy evidence,\u2019 saying \u2018[t]his concept defies both logic and common sense.\u2019 Id. The Seventh Circuit has fully adopted this reasoning. See United States v. Jones, 214 F.3d 836, 838 (7th Cir. 2000) (\u2018An argument that the suspects would have destroyed the drugs, if only they had more time and full possession of their faculties, is not a good reason to suppress probative evidence of crime.\u2019) (citing Segura, 468 U.S. at 813-16) \u2026.\u201d United States v. Darrah, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 170992 (E.D. Wis. Sep. 23, 2024).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The lack of an electronics search protocol in the warrant, even if it was constitutionally required, doesn\u2019t even have to be decided because of the good faith exception. \u201cOkafor suggests that the Constitution might nonetheless demand that a warrant specify … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[12,3,11,16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-58951","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-computer-searches","category-emergency-exigency","category-good-faith-exception","category-warrant-execution"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/58951","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=58951"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/58951\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":58953,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/58951\/revisions\/58953"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=58951"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=58951"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=58951"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}