| D. Pennsylvania [W.D.] |
|
Reminder: These case digests are provided for informational purposes only, and do not constitute legal advice. Anyone conducting legal research on a particular topic or in a specific jurisdiction is advised to supplement these materials with their own efforts or those of a qualified attorney whom they have hired for that purpose.2010U.S. v. Karrer, Crim. No. 08-236 (W.D. Pa. 9-23-2010) — Defendant was indicted on three counts: sexual exploitation of a minor, receipt of child pornography, and possession of child pornography, based in large part in the discovery, during a search of defendant's home, of a cellphone photo showing the sexual molestation of a young girl. Defendant moved to suppress the evidence uncovered during the course of the search, arguing that the warrant authorizing the search was unclear as to the alleged crime and lacked probable cause. He also alleged that the warrant was overly broad. The District Court disagreed. Defendant, 37, was identified as an individual who opened multiple accounts on the children's site Neopets and engaged in inappropriate conversations and conduct. The IP address of the individual was traced to defendant's home. The search warrant and accompanying affidavit reference the state crime of unlawful contact with a minor, which the Court noted could occur on any Internet-capable communication device, including defendant's cellphone. The Court also rejected the argument that the affidavit was not sufficiently particular; while the Court agreed that more detail could have been added, generic seizure of "computer equipment" has been upheld since police may not know in advance in which component contraband is stored. Finally, the Court noted that even these other objects prevailed, the officers still relied on an apparently valid warrant in good faith. |
Please Donate
If you find the resources on this site interesting, or if they have saved you and your client time and money, please support CFD with a donation.
