This document provides background on a case involving the suppression of evidence obtained without a warrant. John Henry Ahrndt was indicted on child pornography charges. His motion to suppress was initially denied but was later granted by the Ninth Circuit which remanded the case. At a second evidentiary hearing, testimony was provided that a neighbor had connected to Ahrndt's unsecured wireless network and viewed file names suggesting child pornography. Police were contacted and viewed one image before losing the connection. Ahrndt now moves again to suppress the evidence against him.
This document is a court opinion from the District Court of Appeal of Florida regarding Daniel Guevara-Vilca's appeal of his convictions for possession of child pornography. The court found that the State committed a discovery violation by failing to disclose a statement Guevara-Vilca made to police before receiving his Miranda rights. This violation prejudiced the defense because it prevented them from pursuing suppression of all of Guevara-Vilca's statements. As a result, the court reversed the convictions and remanded for a new trial. The court also noted the sentencing issue of whether a life sentence in this case would constitute cruel and unusual punishment should be seriously considered if Guevara-Vilca is
This document is an affidavit in support of an application for a search warrant of a residence in Urbandale, Iowa as part of an ongoing criminal investigation. The affidavit provides background details on the investigation, which involves allegations of ongoing criminal conduct, conspiracy, solicitation, extortion, and witness tampering against Tracey Richter. It outlines a complex set of events involving Richter, her ex-husbands Dr. John Pitman and Michael Roberts, and a man named Dustin Wehde who was shot and killed by Richter in 2001 during an alleged home invasion.
FindLaw | Holocaust Museum Shooting Suspect's Murder ChargesLegalDocs
This criminal complaint charges James Wenneker Von Brunn with two counts related to a shooting at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum on June 10, 2009. According to the affidavit, Von Brunn drove to the museum armed with a rifle and shot and killed a security guard when he entered. He was then shot by other security guards and taken into custody. The complaint charges Von Brunn with first degree murder and killing in the course of possessing a firearm in a federal facility based on evidence that he planned and carried out the shooting.
Ex cia officer v do j on covert merlin agentAnonDownload
This document discusses a case involving the disclosure of classified national defense information. It summarizes the lengthy pre-trial proceedings in the case that were caused in part by the defendant refusing a brief continuance and instead forcing an interlocutory appeal. It also questions the credibility of a defense witness, David Manners, who provided an unsworn letter supporting the defendant's claim that his disclosures caused little harm. Manners had previously testified under oath before a grand jury that the defendant was the source for a journalist's book, but later recanted his testimony just before trial. The document argues the trial evidence established harm from the defendant's actions and that Manners' late recantation and unsworn letter should be disreg
A search warrant filed in U.S. District Court, obtained by 7 Eyewitness News, reveals while in the Niagara County jail – James Stivers requested to quote “make a phone call to his sister in order to have her throw out his computer so that he could beat his case.”
Court case, Darren Chaker provides, Stingrey warrant, requires search warrant, involves privacy, constitutional issues in obtaining phone records and data, Fourth Amendment issues are discussed in detail by the court and how the law looks at cutting edge technology.
This document is a motion filed by the plaintiff Jeffrey Howell seeking a preliminary injunction to prohibit enforcement of an Indiana statute criminalizing certain online communications. The plaintiff argues he is likely to succeed on the merits because the statute is nearly identical to communications decency acts previously struck down as unconstitutional for suppressing protected speech between adults. The plaintiff further argues the statute cannot survive strict scrutiny because it effectively bans constitutionally protected speech without including defenses for reasonable efforts to restrict minor access.
This document is a court opinion from the District Court of Appeal of Florida regarding Daniel Guevara-Vilca's appeal of his convictions for possession of child pornography. The court found that the State committed a discovery violation by failing to disclose a statement Guevara-Vilca made to police before receiving his Miranda rights. This violation prejudiced the defense because it prevented them from pursuing suppression of all of Guevara-Vilca's statements. As a result, the court reversed the convictions and remanded for a new trial. The court also noted the sentencing issue of whether a life sentence in this case would constitute cruel and unusual punishment should be seriously considered if Guevara-Vilca is
This document is an affidavit in support of an application for a search warrant of a residence in Urbandale, Iowa as part of an ongoing criminal investigation. The affidavit provides background details on the investigation, which involves allegations of ongoing criminal conduct, conspiracy, solicitation, extortion, and witness tampering against Tracey Richter. It outlines a complex set of events involving Richter, her ex-husbands Dr. John Pitman and Michael Roberts, and a man named Dustin Wehde who was shot and killed by Richter in 2001 during an alleged home invasion.
FindLaw | Holocaust Museum Shooting Suspect's Murder ChargesLegalDocs
This criminal complaint charges James Wenneker Von Brunn with two counts related to a shooting at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum on June 10, 2009. According to the affidavit, Von Brunn drove to the museum armed with a rifle and shot and killed a security guard when he entered. He was then shot by other security guards and taken into custody. The complaint charges Von Brunn with first degree murder and killing in the course of possessing a firearm in a federal facility based on evidence that he planned and carried out the shooting.
Ex cia officer v do j on covert merlin agentAnonDownload
This document discusses a case involving the disclosure of classified national defense information. It summarizes the lengthy pre-trial proceedings in the case that were caused in part by the defendant refusing a brief continuance and instead forcing an interlocutory appeal. It also questions the credibility of a defense witness, David Manners, who provided an unsworn letter supporting the defendant's claim that his disclosures caused little harm. Manners had previously testified under oath before a grand jury that the defendant was the source for a journalist's book, but later recanted his testimony just before trial. The document argues the trial evidence established harm from the defendant's actions and that Manners' late recantation and unsworn letter should be disreg
A search warrant filed in U.S. District Court, obtained by 7 Eyewitness News, reveals while in the Niagara County jail – James Stivers requested to quote “make a phone call to his sister in order to have her throw out his computer so that he could beat his case.”
Court case, Darren Chaker provides, Stingrey warrant, requires search warrant, involves privacy, constitutional issues in obtaining phone records and data, Fourth Amendment issues are discussed in detail by the court and how the law looks at cutting edge technology.
This document is a motion filed by the plaintiff Jeffrey Howell seeking a preliminary injunction to prohibit enforcement of an Indiana statute criminalizing certain online communications. The plaintiff argues he is likely to succeed on the merits because the statute is nearly identical to communications decency acts previously struck down as unconstitutional for suppressing protected speech between adults. The plaintiff further argues the statute cannot survive strict scrutiny because it effectively bans constitutionally protected speech without including defenses for reasonable efforts to restrict minor access.
This document summarizes a court case regarding a same-sex couple challenging California's Proposition 8, which banned same-sex marriage. The court granted California's motion to dismiss, finding that the plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge Proposition 8. Specifically, the court found that the plaintiffs did not demonstrate a concrete and particularized injury, or that their injury could be redressed by a favorable court decision, which are both requirements for standing. This was the second time the plaintiffs had brought similar challenges to the court regarding same-sex marriage bans.
Darren Chaker, opinion by federal court on privacy issues, and in federal case. Important issues in privacy and internet are addressed in lawsuit, very useful cases discussed.
- Congressman James Sensenbrenner, author of the Patriot Act, filed an amicus brief in support of plaintiffs challenging the NSA's mass telephone metadata collection program.
- He argues that Congress intended to authorize collection of documents and records only upon a showing of relevance to an authorized investigation, not a blanket collection of all telephone call records.
- Sensenbrenner also asserts that Congress did not intend to authorize indiscriminate collection of data on every telephone call to or from the US, which violates the privacy of millions of innocent Americans.
Police can no longer search your phone without a warrant, rules Supreme CourtHarrison Weber
The Supreme Court heard two cases regarding warrantless searches of cell phones incident to arrest. In the first case, police searched Riley's smartphone multiple times following his arrest for weapons charges, obtaining evidence used to convict him of additional crimes. In the second case, police searched Wurie's flip phone call log after arresting him for a drug offense and used the information to locate drugs and a firearm in his home. The Court considered whether these warrantless searches violated the Fourth Amendment and ultimately ruled that police generally may not search digital information on a cell phone seized from an individual without first obtaining a warrant.
Federal court order from Nevada, Fourth Amendment issues, detailing illegal detention. Darren Chaker, writes frequently on such issues and was provided the order to help educate people on rights and judicial cases impacting every day life.
FindLaw | Court of Appeals Reverses Entry Bar to Islamic ScholarLegalDocs
This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case regarding the denial of a visa for Tariq Ramadan, an Islamic scholar. The three organizational plaintiffs claimed the denial violated their First Amendment right to have Ramadan share his views in the US. The government denied the visa because Ramadan had contributed funds to a charity that supported Hamas, which the government deemed material support to a terrorist organization. The Court of Appeals concluded that the consular officer who denied the visa did not properly confront Ramadan with the allegations, which prevented Ramadan from demonstrating that he did not know the charity supported terrorism. The Court vacated the decision and remanded the case for further proceedings.
1) The Supreme Court case of US v. Nixon established that executive privilege did not allow the President to withhold subpoenaed evidence and tapes from a criminal trial.
2) The case arose from the Watergate scandal where President Nixon's aides were found to have broken into the Democratic National Committee headquarters.
3) The Court ruled that the separation of powers and generalized need for confidentiality did not allow an absolute, unqualified presidential privilege and the tapes had to be turned over, leading to Nixon's resignation.
This document is a complaint filed by Twitter against the U.S. Department of Justice and other government agencies and officials. Twitter seeks a declaratory judgment that government restrictions on its ability to publish information about national security requests it receives, such as National Security Letters and court orders issued under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, violate its free speech rights under the First Amendment. The government has classified information in Twitter's draft transparency report and has only approved preapproved formats established in a settlement with other tech companies for reporting aggregated data about national security requests. Twitter argues these restrictions are unconstitutional.
This motion requests that the California Department of Justice be designated as a qualified recipient of confidential portions of the deposition of Don Clark, which may be relevant to their investigation into the death of Anna Nicole Smith. The deposition suggests Clark has attempted to influence investigations against Stern despite admitting he has no legitimate evidence of wrongdoing. Designating the California DOJ would allow the relevant deposition testimony to be shared regarding Clark's lack of objectivity and evidence in his pursuit of prosecuting Stern.
Cia director grandiosity v. abilt justicePublicLeaks
This document is a declaration by John Brennan, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, asserting the state secrets privilege and CIA statutory privileges to prevent disclosure of classified information in a lawsuit brought by a former CIA employee. Brennan asserts these privileges to protect information about specific CIA intelligence operations, the identities and roles of covert employees, and sources and methods. He argues that disclosure of such information could reasonably be expected to cause serious or grave damage to national security.
Three sentences:
Aniruddha Sherbow has been charged in the District of Columbia with transmitting threats in interstate commerce for leaving a threatening voicemail for Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard and sending an email threatening to decapitate her. He was arrested in California based on these charges and is appearing for an initial appearance in federal court there. The documents provide details of the threatening communications and establish probable cause for the arrest.
This document is a memorandum of law in support of a motion to suppress evidence filed on behalf of defendant Meshiha Boatwright. It argues that Boatwright was illegally seized by police officers in violation of the Fourth Amendment. Specifically, it contends that the officers lacked reasonable suspicion to stop Boatwright as he entered an apartment building where he was an invited guest. The memorandum aims to contradict the police report describing the events and provide Boatwright's version of facts, asserting he did nothing suspicious to justify being detained. If the court finds the initial seizure unlawful, the memorandum argues all evidence obtained as a result must be suppressed.
Life is Short... Sue Everyone: Legal Perspectives on the Ashley Madison hackAnna Manley
This document provides a legal perspective on the Ashley Madison hack. It summarizes various criminal offenses that may apply to the hackers, including theft, extortion, mischief, and unauthorized access of computer data. It also outlines potential criminal liability for those in possession of stolen data. The document discusses privacy laws like PIPEDA that require security safeguards for sensitive personal information. Finally, it explores the possibility of class action lawsuits against Ashley Madison on the basis of negligence, failure to secure data, and scrubbing fees. The conclusion suggests this legal situation has no clear end.
Mandatory Key Disclosure and Self Incrimination in CanadaAnna Manley
This document discusses key disclosure, self-incrimination, and privacy issues related to mandatory disclosure of encryption keys in Canada. It provides an overview of relevant Canadian cases on compelled production of passwords and encryption keys, such as R. v. Meron in 2004 and R. c. Boudreau-Fontaine in 2010, which found that an accused cannot be ordered to produce their passwords. The document also discusses standards for searches at the border and whether refusing to provide passwords could be considered suspicious. Overall, the document examines the tension between privacy rights and the ability of law enforcement to compel disclosure of encryption keys during a criminal investigation.
BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF AMENDED PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL WITH SANCTIONSAlvin Sutherlin, Jr
This document is a brief in support of a motion to compel the production of body camera footage and related records from a 2013 police incident. It alleges that key exculpatory footage was withheld from the plaintiff during criminal proceedings, in violation of discovery obligations and his civil rights. It requests that the court order the defendants to produce unedited body camera footage and audit records to identify all footage from the named officers involved in the incident.
Federal court, excluding police report, Darren Chaker, provides law on keeping a police report away from the jury in a criminal case, which is important since are usually hearsay and unreliable.
This document is a reply brief filed by defendants in response to the plaintiff's response brief and in support of the defendants' motion for summary judgment. It summarizes that the plaintiff was transferred to a community corrections facility (Dismas) as a transition from federal prison, and agreed to follow its rules. However, the plaintiff admitted driving without permission and possessing a cell phone, in violation of the rules. As a result, he was returned to federal prison to serve the remaining 68 days of his sentence. The brief argues the defendants are entitled to summary judgment on the plaintiff's claims of false arrest, assault, malicious prosecution, abuse of process, negligence and constitutional violations, as the plaintiff cannot prove the elements of these claims or that
Defendants’ reply brief in response to plaintiff’s response brief and in supp...Cocoselul Inaripat
This document is a reply brief filed by the defendants in response to the plaintiff's response brief and in support of the defendants' motion for summary judgment. It summarizes that the plaintiff was transferred to a community corrections facility operated by Dismas Charities as part of his transition from federal prison back into the community. It alleges that the plaintiff violated rules of his placement by driving without permission and possessing a cell phone. As a result, Dismas reported the violations to the Bureau of Prisons, which returned the plaintiff to prison to serve the remaining 68 days of his sentence. The defendants argue they are entitled to summary judgment on the plaintiff's tort claims of false arrest, assault, battery, and malicious prosecution.
Ins immigration prosecutorial discretion memo from general counselUmesh Heendeniya
The document discusses the benefits of exercise for mental health. Regular physical activity can help reduce anxiety and depression and improve mood and cognitive functioning. Exercise causes chemical changes in the brain that may help protect against mental illness and improve symptoms.
Dangerous liaisons study showing that revolving door at sec creates risk of...Umesh Heendeniya
This document discusses the revolving door between the SEC and the financial industry it regulates. It uses the example of former SEC employees lobbying to block Mary Schapiro's 2012 proposal to tighten regulations on money market funds. These former employees, now representing financial firms, met with the SEC and Congress to oppose the proposal. The document suggests their industry experience and connections may have influenced the SEC, including Commissioner Luis Aguilar who previously worked in the money management industry and helped block the proposal. It argues this revolving door can undermine the SEC's independence and ability to properly regulate Wall Street in the public interest.
After opening an immigration case by attorneys – 9th circuitUmesh Heendeniya
This document provides information for attorneys handling counseled immigration cases in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. It outlines the court's contact information and addresses, electronic filing procedures, admission requirements, motions practice guidelines, briefing schedules, and other procedural rules. Key details include mandatory electronic filing for attorneys, a $230 fee for bar admission, a 10-day response deadline for motions, and briefing schedules set after ruling on any stay motion filed with the petition for review.
Section 1983 Litigation by Karen Blum - 136 pagesUmesh Heendeniya
This chapter discusses the "under color of law" element of a Section 1983 claim. It explains that this element is typically met when government employees are performing their official duties. However, when private actors are involved, courts examine whether there was joint action between public and private parties, an intertwined relationship, state encouragement of the private conduct, or a public function was performed. The chapter provides that when suing a government entity, such as a city or county, the "under color of law" requirement is met because the entity was created by state law. Government employees generally act "under color of law" when performing their job duties, even if contrary to state law or when exercising professional discretion.
This document summarizes a court case regarding a same-sex couple challenging California's Proposition 8, which banned same-sex marriage. The court granted California's motion to dismiss, finding that the plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge Proposition 8. Specifically, the court found that the plaintiffs did not demonstrate a concrete and particularized injury, or that their injury could be redressed by a favorable court decision, which are both requirements for standing. This was the second time the plaintiffs had brought similar challenges to the court regarding same-sex marriage bans.
Darren Chaker, opinion by federal court on privacy issues, and in federal case. Important issues in privacy and internet are addressed in lawsuit, very useful cases discussed.
- Congressman James Sensenbrenner, author of the Patriot Act, filed an amicus brief in support of plaintiffs challenging the NSA's mass telephone metadata collection program.
- He argues that Congress intended to authorize collection of documents and records only upon a showing of relevance to an authorized investigation, not a blanket collection of all telephone call records.
- Sensenbrenner also asserts that Congress did not intend to authorize indiscriminate collection of data on every telephone call to or from the US, which violates the privacy of millions of innocent Americans.
Police can no longer search your phone without a warrant, rules Supreme CourtHarrison Weber
The Supreme Court heard two cases regarding warrantless searches of cell phones incident to arrest. In the first case, police searched Riley's smartphone multiple times following his arrest for weapons charges, obtaining evidence used to convict him of additional crimes. In the second case, police searched Wurie's flip phone call log after arresting him for a drug offense and used the information to locate drugs and a firearm in his home. The Court considered whether these warrantless searches violated the Fourth Amendment and ultimately ruled that police generally may not search digital information on a cell phone seized from an individual without first obtaining a warrant.
Federal court order from Nevada, Fourth Amendment issues, detailing illegal detention. Darren Chaker, writes frequently on such issues and was provided the order to help educate people on rights and judicial cases impacting every day life.
FindLaw | Court of Appeals Reverses Entry Bar to Islamic ScholarLegalDocs
This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case regarding the denial of a visa for Tariq Ramadan, an Islamic scholar. The three organizational plaintiffs claimed the denial violated their First Amendment right to have Ramadan share his views in the US. The government denied the visa because Ramadan had contributed funds to a charity that supported Hamas, which the government deemed material support to a terrorist organization. The Court of Appeals concluded that the consular officer who denied the visa did not properly confront Ramadan with the allegations, which prevented Ramadan from demonstrating that he did not know the charity supported terrorism. The Court vacated the decision and remanded the case for further proceedings.
1) The Supreme Court case of US v. Nixon established that executive privilege did not allow the President to withhold subpoenaed evidence and tapes from a criminal trial.
2) The case arose from the Watergate scandal where President Nixon's aides were found to have broken into the Democratic National Committee headquarters.
3) The Court ruled that the separation of powers and generalized need for confidentiality did not allow an absolute, unqualified presidential privilege and the tapes had to be turned over, leading to Nixon's resignation.
This document is a complaint filed by Twitter against the U.S. Department of Justice and other government agencies and officials. Twitter seeks a declaratory judgment that government restrictions on its ability to publish information about national security requests it receives, such as National Security Letters and court orders issued under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, violate its free speech rights under the First Amendment. The government has classified information in Twitter's draft transparency report and has only approved preapproved formats established in a settlement with other tech companies for reporting aggregated data about national security requests. Twitter argues these restrictions are unconstitutional.
This motion requests that the California Department of Justice be designated as a qualified recipient of confidential portions of the deposition of Don Clark, which may be relevant to their investigation into the death of Anna Nicole Smith. The deposition suggests Clark has attempted to influence investigations against Stern despite admitting he has no legitimate evidence of wrongdoing. Designating the California DOJ would allow the relevant deposition testimony to be shared regarding Clark's lack of objectivity and evidence in his pursuit of prosecuting Stern.
Cia director grandiosity v. abilt justicePublicLeaks
This document is a declaration by John Brennan, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, asserting the state secrets privilege and CIA statutory privileges to prevent disclosure of classified information in a lawsuit brought by a former CIA employee. Brennan asserts these privileges to protect information about specific CIA intelligence operations, the identities and roles of covert employees, and sources and methods. He argues that disclosure of such information could reasonably be expected to cause serious or grave damage to national security.
Three sentences:
Aniruddha Sherbow has been charged in the District of Columbia with transmitting threats in interstate commerce for leaving a threatening voicemail for Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard and sending an email threatening to decapitate her. He was arrested in California based on these charges and is appearing for an initial appearance in federal court there. The documents provide details of the threatening communications and establish probable cause for the arrest.
This document is a memorandum of law in support of a motion to suppress evidence filed on behalf of defendant Meshiha Boatwright. It argues that Boatwright was illegally seized by police officers in violation of the Fourth Amendment. Specifically, it contends that the officers lacked reasonable suspicion to stop Boatwright as he entered an apartment building where he was an invited guest. The memorandum aims to contradict the police report describing the events and provide Boatwright's version of facts, asserting he did nothing suspicious to justify being detained. If the court finds the initial seizure unlawful, the memorandum argues all evidence obtained as a result must be suppressed.
Life is Short... Sue Everyone: Legal Perspectives on the Ashley Madison hackAnna Manley
This document provides a legal perspective on the Ashley Madison hack. It summarizes various criminal offenses that may apply to the hackers, including theft, extortion, mischief, and unauthorized access of computer data. It also outlines potential criminal liability for those in possession of stolen data. The document discusses privacy laws like PIPEDA that require security safeguards for sensitive personal information. Finally, it explores the possibility of class action lawsuits against Ashley Madison on the basis of negligence, failure to secure data, and scrubbing fees. The conclusion suggests this legal situation has no clear end.
Mandatory Key Disclosure and Self Incrimination in CanadaAnna Manley
This document discusses key disclosure, self-incrimination, and privacy issues related to mandatory disclosure of encryption keys in Canada. It provides an overview of relevant Canadian cases on compelled production of passwords and encryption keys, such as R. v. Meron in 2004 and R. c. Boudreau-Fontaine in 2010, which found that an accused cannot be ordered to produce their passwords. The document also discusses standards for searches at the border and whether refusing to provide passwords could be considered suspicious. Overall, the document examines the tension between privacy rights and the ability of law enforcement to compel disclosure of encryption keys during a criminal investigation.
BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF AMENDED PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL WITH SANCTIONSAlvin Sutherlin, Jr
This document is a brief in support of a motion to compel the production of body camera footage and related records from a 2013 police incident. It alleges that key exculpatory footage was withheld from the plaintiff during criminal proceedings, in violation of discovery obligations and his civil rights. It requests that the court order the defendants to produce unedited body camera footage and audit records to identify all footage from the named officers involved in the incident.
Federal court, excluding police report, Darren Chaker, provides law on keeping a police report away from the jury in a criminal case, which is important since are usually hearsay and unreliable.
This document is a reply brief filed by defendants in response to the plaintiff's response brief and in support of the defendants' motion for summary judgment. It summarizes that the plaintiff was transferred to a community corrections facility (Dismas) as a transition from federal prison, and agreed to follow its rules. However, the plaintiff admitted driving without permission and possessing a cell phone, in violation of the rules. As a result, he was returned to federal prison to serve the remaining 68 days of his sentence. The brief argues the defendants are entitled to summary judgment on the plaintiff's claims of false arrest, assault, malicious prosecution, abuse of process, negligence and constitutional violations, as the plaintiff cannot prove the elements of these claims or that
Defendants’ reply brief in response to plaintiff’s response brief and in supp...Cocoselul Inaripat
This document is a reply brief filed by the defendants in response to the plaintiff's response brief and in support of the defendants' motion for summary judgment. It summarizes that the plaintiff was transferred to a community corrections facility operated by Dismas Charities as part of his transition from federal prison back into the community. It alleges that the plaintiff violated rules of his placement by driving without permission and possessing a cell phone. As a result, Dismas reported the violations to the Bureau of Prisons, which returned the plaintiff to prison to serve the remaining 68 days of his sentence. The defendants argue they are entitled to summary judgment on the plaintiff's tort claims of false arrest, assault, battery, and malicious prosecution.
Ins immigration prosecutorial discretion memo from general counselUmesh Heendeniya
The document discusses the benefits of exercise for mental health. Regular physical activity can help reduce anxiety and depression and improve mood and cognitive functioning. Exercise causes chemical changes in the brain that may help protect against mental illness and improve symptoms.
Dangerous liaisons study showing that revolving door at sec creates risk of...Umesh Heendeniya
This document discusses the revolving door between the SEC and the financial industry it regulates. It uses the example of former SEC employees lobbying to block Mary Schapiro's 2012 proposal to tighten regulations on money market funds. These former employees, now representing financial firms, met with the SEC and Congress to oppose the proposal. The document suggests their industry experience and connections may have influenced the SEC, including Commissioner Luis Aguilar who previously worked in the money management industry and helped block the proposal. It argues this revolving door can undermine the SEC's independence and ability to properly regulate Wall Street in the public interest.
After opening an immigration case by attorneys – 9th circuitUmesh Heendeniya
This document provides information for attorneys handling counseled immigration cases in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. It outlines the court's contact information and addresses, electronic filing procedures, admission requirements, motions practice guidelines, briefing schedules, and other procedural rules. Key details include mandatory electronic filing for attorneys, a $230 fee for bar admission, a 10-day response deadline for motions, and briefing schedules set after ruling on any stay motion filed with the petition for review.
Section 1983 Litigation by Karen Blum - 136 pagesUmesh Heendeniya
This chapter discusses the "under color of law" element of a Section 1983 claim. It explains that this element is typically met when government employees are performing their official duties. However, when private actors are involved, courts examine whether there was joint action between public and private parties, an intertwined relationship, state encouragement of the private conduct, or a public function was performed. The chapter provides that when suing a government entity, such as a city or county, the "under color of law" requirement is met because the entity was created by state law. Government employees generally act "under color of law" when performing their job duties, even if contrary to state law or when exercising professional discretion.
This document is a petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court regarding a class action lawsuit. The petition addresses two questions: 1) whether SLUSA precludes class actions alleging fraud related to transactions in covered securities, and 2) whether SLUSA precludes class actions alleging aiding and abetting of fraud related to covered securities when the defendants did not make misrepresentations. There is a circuit split on both issues. The petition asks the Supreme Court to resolve the conflicting interpretations of SLUSA.
Radcliffe v. Experian - Class action representatives' conflict of interestUmesh Heendeniya
The panel reversed the district court's approval of a class action settlement between consumers and credit reporting agencies. The panel found that the named class representatives and class counsel did not adequately represent the interests of absent class members. Specifically, the settlement agreement conditioned incentive awards for the class representatives on their support for the settlement. This created a divergence of interests, as the incentive awards far exceeded what absent class members would receive. Due to this conflict of interest, the district court should not have approved the settlement.
Gatto v. United Air Lines, Inc. - Spoliation Instruction in Facebook Account ...Umesh Heendeniya
Gatto vs. United Air Lines, Inc. - Spoliation Instruction in Facebook Account Deletion.
Frank Gatto, United Air Lines, Allied Aviation Services, Spoliation Instruction, Destroying Evidence.
1) Assignment 1 ( 2 Pages )
Post-Assessment:
Mr. Fahad Naseem, and Mr. Ronald Joseph FBI Agent.
Mr. Fahad Naseem was arrested in connection with the kidnapping and killing of journalist Daniel Pearl and admitted sending ransom e-mails using his Laptop. The laptop and handwritten versions of the e-mails were found in his possession.
On the Contrary-A,
Naseem later retracted his confession and the defense attorney asserted that logs from Mr. Naseem's Internet Service Provider (ISP) indicated that Mr. Naseem's account was not active and connected to the Internet at the time the e-mails were sent.
On the Contrary-B
Naseem's defense attorney claimed that the compromised Laptop produced in court had a different serial number from the one that was initially recorded in police records; hence, documentation relating to the computer and evidence in the case was inconsistent.
On the Contrary-C
Documentation presented in court indicated that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agent, Mr. Ronald Joseph examined Mr. Naseem's Laptop between February 4 and 7, 2002. In contrast, documents indicated that the Laptop was not seized from Mr. Naseem until February 11, 2002, and
the court denied the appeal, including the following explanation.
On the Contrary-D
The lead investigator Mr. Shaikh Naeem recovered the Laptop labeled (connection No. 66) retrieved from the accused, Mr. Fahad Naseem, on November 2, 2002, was provided to Mr. Ronald Joseph, FBI agent, who examined, conducted the forensic investigation, formulated his report, and conveyed evidence to the Consulate General of the United States of America.
The report's content asserted that the Black Soft Computer came with "Proworld" written on the exterior of the Laptop, and upon opening the case, a Dell Latitude Cpi laptop was discovered.
The Laptop was identified in the report produced by this witness to be of model PPL with Serial number ZH942 located inside the Laptop as an IBM travel star hard driver [
sic
], confirmed to have been removed from the Laptop.
During examination, the label on the hard drive was identified as a system with 4.3 GB storage capacity, and serial number OKLA24302 on the outside of the laptop.
After examining Exhibits, Mushernama who recovered the Laptop asserted that without a doubt whatever, the compromised Laptop is the same equipment that was seized from the accused, Mr. Fahad Naseem on November 2, 2002.
On the Contrary-E
The forensic investigation report confirmed that the same Laptop was recovered on April 2, 2002 by the defense team. Availability of the Laptop at the American Consulate on April 2, 2002 is not unnatural and impossible because Marianne Pearl filed a complaint with the police on April 2, 2002, hours when the case was in the at the hands of the Investigating Agency.
Questions 1. As an Aspirant and Hopeful Digital Forensic Investigator:
1:1. Submit concluding evidence to the public and the court substantiating that Mr.
Case Brief InstructionsYou will prepare a Case Brief on th.docxmichelljubborjudd
Case Brief Instructions
You will prepare a Case Brief on the provided judicial opinion regarding a criminal justice topic included below , CAVITT v. STATE. DO NOT USE INFORMATION FROM THE CASE BRIEF SAMPLE. The judicial opinion that you will prepare a Case Brief on can be found below. The Case Brief must include the following sections: Caption, Facts, Procedural History, Issue, Rule of Law, Holding, and Rationale. The Case Brief must be 1 page. A heading must be provided for each section of the Case Brief. Save your work as a Microsoft Word document and review the Sample Case Brief provided below.
CAVITT v. STATE Miss. 1199 Cite as 159 So.3d 1199 (Miss.App. 2015) preme court’s notation in Bounds, Bounds asserts that the judge, not the jury, set his sentence at life in prison. Id. Hence, he claims that the imposition of a life sentence by the circuit court judge created an illegal sentence that defeats the statute of limitations on his appeal. ¶ 3. In its order dated January 7, 2014, the circuit court summarily dismissed Bounds’s PCR motion—in part because Bounds failed to seek leave from the supreme court to file the PCR motion and in part because the circuit court found that his case is not excepted from the statute of limitations. On January 21, 2014, Bounds, having reviewed the circuit court’s order, filed a motion for leave from the supreme court to proceed with his PCR motion. On January 27, 2014, Bounds filed the instant appeal. Nonetheless, on June 25, 2014, the supreme court denied Bounds’s request for leave, stating: In the application for leave before this panel, Bounds merely states that his sentence was illegal. He offers no argument and does not support his contention. Bounds’s conviction and sentence were affirmed by this Court, and the mandate issued in 1972. Accordingly, we find that Bounds has failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a state or federal right, and his application for leave should be dismissed as timebarred. Despite the supreme court’s denial of Bounds’s motion for leave to proceed with his PCR motion, Bounds has continued in his appeal of the matter. DISCUSSION [1, 2] ¶ 4. Mississippi law requires that a movant must obtain permission from the supreme court to file a PCR motion in a circuit court if the movant’s conviction has been affirmed by the appellate court on direct appeal or if the direct appeal has been dismissed. Miss.Code Ann. § 99–39– 7 (Supp.2014). ‘‘This procedure is not merely advisory, but jurisdictional.’’ Bownes v. State, 963 So.2d 1277, 1278 (¶ 3) (Miss.Ct.App.2007) (citation omitted). We have consistently held that when a movant fails to obtain the requisite permission from the supreme court, all other courts lack the jurisdiction necessary to review the movant’s PCR motion. See Doss v. State, 757 So.2d 1016, 1017 (¶ 7) (Miss.Ct. App.2000); Bownes, 963 So.2d at 1279 (¶ 4). Accordingly, both the circuit court and this Court are without jurisdiction to review Bounds’s appeal. As ...
Case 11-1286 Document 45 Filed 05082012 Pages 66 .docxannandleola
Case: 11-1286 Document: 45 Filed: 05/08/2012 Pages: 66
In the
United States Court of Appeals
For the Seventh Circuit
No. 11-1286
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF ILLINOIS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
ANITA ALVAREZ,
Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division.
No. 10 C 5235—Suzanne B. Conlon, Judge.
ARGUED SEPTEMBER 13, 2011—DECIDED MAY 8, 2012
Before POSNER, SYKES, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.
SYKES, Circuit Judge. The Illinois eavesdropping statute
makes it a felony to audio record “all or any part of
any conversation” unless all parties to the conversation
give their consent. 720 ILL. COMP. STAT. 5/14-2(a)(1). The
statute covers any oral communication regardless of
whether the communication was intended to be private.
Id. 5/14-1(d). The offense is normally a class 4 felony but
is elevated to a class 1 felony—with a possible prison
Case: 11-1286 Document: 45 Filed: 05/08/2012 Pages: 66
2 No. 11-1286
term of four to fifteen years—if one of the recorded indi-
viduals is performing duties as a law-enforcement officer.
Id. 5/14-4(b). Illinois does not prohibit taking silent video
of police officers performing their duties in public;
turning on a microphone, however, triggers class 1 felony
punishment.
The question here is whether the First Amendment
prevents Illinois prosecutors from enforcing the eaves-
dropping statute against people who openly record
police officers performing their official duties in public.
More specifically, the American Civil Liberties Union
of Illinois (“ACLU”) challenges the statute as applied to
the organization’s Chicago-area “police accountability
program,” which includes a plan to openly make audio-
visual recordings of police officers performing their
duties in public places and speaking at a volume audible
to bystanders. Concerned that its videographers would
be prosecuted under the eavesdropping statute, the
ACLU has not yet implemented the program. Instead,
it filed this preenforcement action against Anita Alvarez,
the Cook County State’s Attorney, asking for declaratory
and injunctive relief barring her from enforcing the
statute on these facts. The ACLU moved for a prelim-
inary injunction.
Faced with so obvious a test case, the district court
proceeded with some skepticism. The judge dismissed
the complaint for lack of standing, holding that the
ACLU had not sufficiently alleged a threat of prosecution.
The ACLU tried again, submitting a new complaint
addressing the court’s concerns. This time, the judge held
Case: 11-1286 Document: 45 Filed: 05/08/2012 Pages: 66
No. 11-1286 3
that the ACLU had cured the original defect but had “not
alleged a cognizable First Amendment injury” because
the First Amendment does not protect a “right to audio
record.” The judge denied leave to amend. The ACLU
appealed.
We re.
This document is an appellate court opinion regarding a defamation lawsuit filed by Mindi Larue and Jeremy Tucker against David and Sarah Brown. The court affirmed the jury's verdict finding the Browns liable for defamation. It held that while the initial defamatory statements were published over a year before the lawsuit, later comments and responses by the Browns on the website constituted republication of the statements, making the lawsuit timely under the one-year statute of limitations.
1) The case was to determine if there is a "good faith" exception to the exclusionary rule, which bars illegally obtained evidence from criminal trials.
2) The US argued that police reasonably relied on a search warrant, though it was based on an anonymous tip, to search Leon's home and find illegal drugs.
3) The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that there is a good faith exception, and the evidence could be used against Leon at trial.
Computer/Internet Crime - Child porn - Evidence Julie Jackson
This document summarizes the investigation and prosecution of Kenneth Lester Jackson for possession of child pornography. The investigation began when Detective Tilley monitoring a peer-to-peer file sharing network noticed files containing child pornography being downloaded by a user. Through subpoenas, the user was identified as Kenneth Jackson living at an address in Englewood, Ohio. A search warrant was executed at Jackson's apartment where several electronic devices containing child pornography were seized. Jackson was subsequently indicted, pled guilty to three felony counts of pandering obscenity involving a minor, and was sentenced to two years in prison.
ORane M Cornish affidavit statement for New Britain court proving Wentworth'...Oranecornish
This affidavit contained a copy of Case# 3:23-cv-01612, all inks to all video disproving officer Calvin Wentworths falsified report , Consent to the preliminary Junction to 54 Helen Drive, New Britain CT, 06010, given by Erina Ponzini and a demand to return the bond for the false warrant . It was delivered by ORane M. Cornish Jr on 5/13/2024 to New Britain superor courts clerks office and was said by the clerk to be put in the folder for this case on 5/13/2024
This document contains vocabulary terms and definitions related to law and the criminal justice system. It was edited by Paola on April 8, 2015 and contains contributions from several students defining terms like delusion, defendant, testimony, racial profiling, alibi, rehabilitation, sentence, psychiatric, acquittal, prosecution, search warrant, interrogation, financial compensation, exonerate, try-trial-mistrial, unresolved, convict, and perjury.
Former New York State Supreme Court Justice Thomas J. Spargo was convicted of attempted extortion and bribery for soliciting a $10,000 payment from an attorney with cases pending before him. When the attorney declined to pay, Spargo increased the pressure through an associate. Spargo then directly told the attorney his cases and personal divorce would be in jeopardy if he did not pay. The conviction upholds the principle that judges should serve the public, not their own interests, and that extorting money from those in the legal system breaks the very laws judges are sworn to uphold.
This order grants default judgment in favor of the plaintiff, Igor Malenko, in a lawsuit against Lori Handrahan. The court found that Handrahan made repeated false allegations against Malenko, including claims of abuse, mental illness, and sexual abuse of their child. These false claims interfered with Malenko's parental rights and caused emotional harm to their child. The court awarded Malenko $450,000 in damages for his individual claims and $300,000 for claims brought on behalf of his minor child.
The document discusses how in response to terrorist attacks like 9/11, the government has passed legislation like the Patriot Act and FISA that expand surveillance powers but may infringe on civil liberties. It examines several court cases where the State Secrets privilege was used to dismiss lawsuits around warrantless wiretapping programs. While greater security is important, especially during times of crisis, balancing it with civil liberties is challenging and precedents set now may undermine constitutional rights in the long run. Oversight is needed to prevent abuse of powers and protect individuals.
Our unstable world has left many American’s to consider the costs and benefits of national security and civil rights. This paper briefly reviews the States Secret Privilege, Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), and The Patriot Act. In response to the attacks to our financial capital in New York and our nation’s defense department, The Patriot Act was enacted. These expansive powers granted to protect our security are examined in terms of how the impact upon potential limitations to our Constitutional Rights.
The document describes a hypothetical nightmare case involving the search of two computers seized during the execution of a drug warrant. Various issues arose during the searches of the computers, including finding child pornography, accessing password protected files and websites, and discovering highly personal files. Both defendants filed motions to suppress evidence and civil actions alleging privacy violations. The judge granted the motions and found violations of the 4th Amendment, Privacy Protection Act, and Electronic Communications Privacy Act, dismissing all charges and awarding substantial damages. Key issues discussed include preparing search warrants, executing searches, post-search procedures, and relevant federal statutes governing electronic records.
This document summarizes a Supreme Court case report regarding interrogation procedures and the right to remain silent. It discusses how the Supreme Court ruled that confessions obtained without informing suspects of their rights cannot be used against them in court. The Court also said interrogation must cease if the suspect requests a lawyer. The case led to new safeguards being put in place around police questioning of suspects to protect their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
Complaint Against Jewish Dr. Michael Brenet victim2012
Major Keyvan Nourhaghighi wrote a letter to Anna Dunscombe at the Health Professions Appeal and Review Board regarding a hearing on his complaint against Dr. Michael Brent. [1] He states that the panel was satisfied that not all documents were disclosed to the College in its decision, such as a poster displayed in Brent's office. [2] Major Nourhaghighi discusses complaints he has filed since 1994 against attorneys general and the judiciary system alleging violations of his rights. He provides examples of alleged torture by police. [3] He believes the HPARB has a right to know about the alleged evil acts of respondents in his complaints.
Laws Governing Access to Search & Arrest Warrants and Wiretap TranscriptsUmesh Heendeniya
1) The document discusses the case of Annie Le, a 24-year-old Yale graduate student who disappeared from campus in 2009. Her disappearance and the subsequent investigation and arrest of Raymond Clark sparked intense media interest.
2) Courts have differed on whether the public has a right to access search warrant materials. Some courts have found a First Amendment right of access while others have found only a common law right of access. There is also debate around when in an investigation warrant materials must be released.
3) Like search warrants, arrest warrants often have supporting affidavits that can provide useful information but courts have been less active in determining public access to these documents. Some states have rules governing whether and when arrest warrant affidavits can
Pick two of the types of criminal acts discussed in the readings and.docxrowthechang
Pick two of the types of criminal acts discussed in the readings and conduct an internet search for cases in which a security professional was charged with those particular offenses. Explain in detail the facts of the case, why you selected it and the outcome of the case.
Technical Requirements
•
Your paper must be at a minimum of 2-3 pages (the Title and Reference pages do not count towards the minimum limit).
•
Scholarly and credible references should be used. A good rule of thumb is at least 2 scholarly sources per page of content.
•
Type in Times New Roman, 12 point and double space.
Reference
Nemeth, C. (2011). Private Security and The Law-4th Edition (4th ed.). Waltham, MA: Elsevier
Butterworth-Heinemann.
Lola Rabon, Appellee, v. Guardsmark, Inc., Appellant No. 76-2398 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
571 F.2d 1277; 1978 U.S. App. LEXIS 12576 November 9, 1977, Argued February 16, 1978, Decided
PRIOR HISTORY: Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Sol Blatt, Jr., District Judge.
DISPOSITION: Reversed.
CASE SUMMARY: PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Appellant security company sought review of a judgment from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina which granted summary judgment to appellee injured person in her action which sought damages from the security company after the injured person was sexually assaulted at her place of employment by a security guard employed by the security company.
OVERVIEW: The security company provided security services where the injured person was employed. The injured person was sexually assaulted by a security guard employed by the security company and sought to find the security company liable for the attack. The district court found that, under state law, the security company would have a higher standard of care because the assault occurred at the place where the security company's business was carried out and because it was committed with a gun supplied by the security company. The court noted that only common carriers owed its patrons the highest degree of care. The court, however, disagreed with the district court's extension of that standard of care to the security company. The court found that the cases which extended the highest degree of care to the employer all involved common carriers and that it was unclear from the law the reasons for the state's adoption of the higher standard of liability. The court refused to extend liability to the security company for the unauthorized acts of its employee without some reasonable basis in the law and noted that S.C. Code § 56-646.1 et seq. was a licensing statute and did not impute liability. (Lola Rabon, Appellee, v. Guardsmark, Inc.)
There are three reasons usually given for the extraordinary liability of common carriers. First, the contract of passage between the carrier and the passenger is said to contain an implied assurance that the passenger will be transpor.
Court dockets are typically public records that allow the public and press to be aware of cases and follow their progress through the legal system. However, some courts are keeping cases secret by omitting them from public dockets. These "secret dockets" threaten transparency and First Amendment rights. Recent examples involve terrorism cases, but secrecy is also used in other types of cases like divorces. Secret proceedings bypass public scrutiny and oversight of the judicial system.
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORKNowseore
YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED to answer the Complaint in this action and to serve a copy of your Answer on the undersigned attorneys for Plaintiff, AIDALA, BERTUNA & KAMINS P.C., at 546 5th Avenue, New York, New York, 10036, within twenty (20) days after the service of this Summons and Complaint, exclusive of the day of service, or within thirty (30) days after the service is complete, if this Summons is not personally delivered to you within the State of New York.
This brief was submitted by the Georgia First Amendment Foundation as an amicus curiae in support of reversing the lower court's ruling. It argues that (1) personnel records, like Deputy Glisson's file, must be disclosed under the open records act and are not exempt just because they relate to a pending investigation, and (2) 911 tapes should be treated like initial police reports which are disclosable regardless of any investigation under the law. The brief provides background on the case, outlines the legal arguments, and urges the Supreme Court to reverse to ensure transparency as intended by the open records act.
Similar to Usa vs. arhndt judge says police need a warrant to view files on wireless network (20)
James Carmody v. Kansas City Board of Police CommissionersUmesh Heendeniya
This document is a summary of a United States Court of Appeals case regarding claims brought by three police officers (James Carmody, Marcus Davis, and Robert Vivona) against the Kansas City Board of Police Commissioners and Captain Mark Daniel Heimer under the Fair Labor Standards Act for unpaid overtime compensation. The district court struck affidavits submitted by the officers in opposition to summary judgment and granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants. The appellate court affirmed, finding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in striking the affidavits because the officers failed to properly disclose the information during discovery. The appellate court also found that without the affidavits, the officers failed to provide sufficient evidence to show they suffered actual damages from unpaid overtime as required.
Jennifer Westendorf v. West Coast Contractors of NevadaUmesh Heendeniya
This document summarizes an appeals court opinion regarding a sexual harassment and retaliation case brought by Jennifer Westendorf against her former employer, West Coast Contractors. The court affirmed summary judgment in favor of the defendant on the sexual harassment claim, finding the conduct was not severe or pervasive enough to create a hostile work environment. However, the court reversed summary judgment on the retaliation claim, finding issues of material fact as to whether Westendorf's complaints of harassment caused her termination and whether she reasonably believed the conduct violated Title VII, making her complaints protected activity.
Libor Lawsuit - In Re _ LIBOR Antitrust Litigation vs. Bank of America, JPMor...Umesh Heendeniya
This document discusses several lawsuits brought against banks for their alleged manipulation of the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) between August 2007 and May 2010. LIBOR is a benchmark interest rate compiled by the British Bankers' Association based on rates submitted by major banks and used globally in contracts, derivatives, and loans worth trillions of dollars. The lawsuits allege that the banks conspired to artificially suppress the LIBOR rate to portray themselves as financially healthier and pay lower interest rates on LIBOR-linked financial products. The document provides background on LIBOR and outlines the plaintiffs' allegations while noting factual disputes remain. It then evaluates the defendants' motions to dismiss aspects of the plaintiffs' antitrust, RICO, and
Estate of Carlos Centeno, deceased v. Raani Corporation, Rashid A. Chaudary, ...Umesh Heendeniya
Estate of Carlos Centeno, deceased vs. Raani Corporation, Rashid A. Chaudary, Balwinder Singh, Muhammad Javaid, Pervaiz Jafri, and Ron’s Staffing Services Inc. - Lawsuit.
Scott Dominguez, Allan Elias, OSHA
Boston Police Officers' Cocaine Drug Testing Appeals Overturned by State Boar...Umesh Heendeniya
Boston Police Officers' (Officers Preston Thompson, Richard Beckers, Ronnie Jones, Jacqueline McGowan, Oscar Bridgeman, Shawn Harris, Walter Washington, Willaim Bridgeforth, George Downing, and Rudy Guity) Cocaine Drug Testing Appeals Overturned by State Board and Officers are Reinstated.
Rob Lowe and Sheryl Lowe v. Laura Boyce and Does 1 through 100 - Lawsuit Agai...Umesh Heendeniya
Rob Lowe and Sheryl Lowe vs. Laura Boyce and Does 1 through 100 - Lawsuit Against Ex_Nanny.
"Rob Lowe", "Sheryl Lowe", "Laura Boyce", "Does 1 through 100", "Jessica Gibson"
Steven Wittels v. David Sanford and Jeremy Heisler - Lawsuit complaintUmesh Heendeniya
This is a legal document filed in New York County on March 22, 2013 regarding a case with index number 651062/2013. It was received by NYSCEF, the New York State Courts Electronic Filing system, on the same day it was filed. The document is the initial filing for this case.
Knives and the Second Amendment, by David Kopel, EsqUmesh Heendeniya
This article analyzes whether knives are protected under the Second Amendment right to bear arms. It discusses various state and local laws regulating knives, some of which may be unconstitutional. These include bans on types of folding knives (switchblades, gravity knives, butterfly knives) and bans on carrying knives more strictly than handguns. The article argues that most knives are protected by the Second Amendment and that many knife laws fail even intermediate scrutiny and are thus unconstitutional. It also provides data showing knives are typically less dangerous than handguns.
Estate of Andrew Lee Scott vs. Richard Sylvester, et al - Lake County Wrongfu...Umesh Heendeniya
Estate of Andrew Lee Scott vs. Richard Sylvester, et al - Lake County Wrongful Death Lawsuit. Killing of Andrew Lee Scott by Deputy Sheriff Richard Sylvester.
Stephen Slevin vs. Board of County Commissioners - Lawsuit Against Jail for M...Umesh Heendeniya
Stephen Slevin (59) left in solitary confinement (by jail director Chris Barela and former medical director Dr. Daniel Zemek) in the Dona Ana County, New Mexico jail for 2 years gets $15.5 million lawsuit settlement.
The tax payers are on the hook for $9.5 million while the county's liability insurance carriers will pay $6 million.
Jordan Davis vs. Michael Dunn - Wrongful death lawsuit filed by Afro-American...Umesh Heendeniya
The document discusses the results of a study on the impact of COVID-19 lockdowns on air pollution. The study found that lockdowns led to short-term reductions in nitrogen dioxide and fine particulate matter concentrations globally. However, the decreases in air pollution were temporary and not sufficient to significantly improve air quality or public health in the long run without systemic changes to reduce fossil fuel use and other polluting activities.
Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 - Police have no duty to protect c...Umesh Heendeniya
This document summarizes two court cases (No. 79-6 and No. 79-394) in which individuals sued the District of Columbia and police department for negligence. In No. 79-6, three women were sexually assaulted after multiple failed responses to their calls for help. The court found that the police department did not have a specific legal duty to provide protection to individuals. In No. 79-394, a man was assaulted after a police officer failed to obtain identification of the assailants. The court again found no specific legal duty was owed to individuals. The court affirmed that governments have a general duty to provide public services to the public at large, but not specific legal duties to individuals absent a special relationship.
Wall Street and the Financial Crisis-Anatomy of a Financial Collapse, by US S...Umesh Heendeniya
Wall Street and the Financial Crisis-Anatomy of a Financial Collapse, by US Senate Permanent SubCommittee, Senators Carl Levin and Tom Coburn - 646-Page
U.S. Congress's Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission Report 662-PagesUmesh Heendeniya
Sarah A. Webber
PREFACE
This report is the result of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission’s examination of the
financial and economic crisis that gripped our nation in 2008 and its aftermath.
The Commission was established by the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009
(Public Law 111-21) and charged with examining the causes of the crisis. The Commission
was directed to submit a full and complete report to the President and Congress by
December 15, 2010.
The Commission held 19 days of public hearings during which it heard testimony from
more than 700 witnesses. The Commission reviewed millions of pages of documents from
the financial institutions, government agencies, and other sources. The Commission also
inter
You may be stressed about revealing your cancer diagnosis to your child or children.
Children love stories and these often provide parents with a means of broaching tricky subjects and so the ‘The Secret Warrior’ book was especially written for CANSA TLC, by creative writer and social worker, Sally Ann Carter.
Find out more:
https://cansa.org.za/resources-to-help-share-a-parent-or-loved-ones-cancer-diagnosis-with-a-child/
As we navigate through the ebbs and flows of life, it is natural to experience moments of low motivation and dwindling passion for our goals.
However, it is important to remember that this is a common hurdle that can be overcome with the right strategies in place.
In this guide, we will explore ways to rekindle the fire within you and stay motivated towards your aspirations.
Understanding of Self - Applied Social Psychology - Psychology SuperNotesPsychoTech Services
A proprietary approach developed by bringing together the best of learning theories from Psychology, design principles from the world of visualization, and pedagogical methods from over a decade of training experience, that enables you to: Learn better, faster!
Inspire: Igniting the Spark of Human Potentialgauravingole9
Inspire: Igniting the Spark of Human Potential
Inspiration is the force that propels individuals from ordinary to extraordinary. It transforms ideas into innovations, dreams into realities, and individuals into icons. This article delves into the multifaceted nature of inspiration, exploring its sources such as nature, art, personal experiences, and the achievements of others, and its profound impact on personal growth, societal progress, and cultural evolution. Through the lens of historical figures and timeless quotes, we uncover how inspiration fuels creativity, drives societal change, and ignites the spark of human potential.
Procrastination is a common challenge that many individuals face when it comes to completing tasks and achieving goals. It can hinder productivity and lead to feelings of stress and frustration.
However, with the right strategies and mindset, it is possible to overcome procrastination and increase productivity.
In this article, we will explore the causes of procrastination, how to recognize the signs of procrastination in oneself, and effective strategies for overcoming procrastination and boosting productivity.
Best Way to Overcome Procrastination and Increase Productivity.pdf
Usa vs. arhndt judge says police need a warrant to view files on wireless network
1. Case 3:08-cr-00468-KI Document 78 Filed 01/17/13 Page 1 of 23 Page ID#: 463
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF OREGON
PORTLAND DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Criminal Case No. 3:08-CR-00468-KI
Plaintiff, OPINION AND ORDER ON
MOTION TO SUPPRESS
v.
JOHN HENRY AHRNDT,
Defendant.
S. Amanda Marshall
United States Attorney
District of Oregon
Gregory R. Nyhus
United States Attorney's Office
1000 SW Third Ave., Ste. 600
Portland, OR 97204
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Page 1 - OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS
2. Case 3:08-cr-00468-KI Document 78 Filed 01/17/13 Page 2 of 23 Page ID#: 464
Francesca Freccero
Federal Public Defender’s Office
101 SW Main St., Ste 1700
Portland, OR 97204
Attorney for Defendant
KING, Judge:
John Henry Ahrndt moves to suppress evidence and statements obtained as a result of a
warrantless search made by a police officer’s connection to Ahrndt’s personal wireless network and
opening one of his shared files. Pending before me is Ahrndt’s renewed Motion to Suppress [23,
69]. For the following reasons, I grant the motion and suppress evidence agents discovered on
Ahrndt’s storage media and the subsequent statements he made to them.
BACKGROUND
I. Procedural History of the Case
Ahrndt was indicted on October 16, 2008 with one count of Transportation of Child
Pornography and one count of Possession of Child Pornography.
I denied Ahrndt’s motion to suppress on January 28, 2010, and defendant entered a
conditional guilty plea to Count 2. The government dismissed Count 1 and I sentenced Ahrndt to
the mandatory minimum of 120 months on Count 2. I allowed release pending appeal.
In an unpublished memorandum, the Ninth Circuit reversed and remanded for additional
fact finding. United States v. Ahrndt, 475 F. App’x 656, 657 (9th Cir. 2012) [60] (hereinafter,
“Ahrndt II”). While awaiting briefing for the second evidentiary hearing, I granted Ahrndt’s
Page 2 - OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS
3. Case 3:08-cr-00468-KI Document 78 Filed 01/17/13 Page 3 of 23 Page ID#: 465
motion to withdraw his previous guilty plea and I granted the United States’ motion to dismiss
Count 1. Accordingly, Possession of Child Pornography is the only remaining charge.
I held a second evidentiary hearing on November 15, 2012, again taking the testimony of
Ahrndt’s expert witness, Robert Young. The government declined to present additional
evidence.
II. Background Facts
After the second evidentiary hearing, and considering the evidence adduced at the first
evidentiary hearing, I find as follows:
On February 21, 2007, a woman referred to as JH was using her personal computer at her
home in Aloha, Oregon. She was connected to the internet via her own wireless network, but,
when her wireless network malfunctioned, her computer automatically picked up another nearby
wireless network called “Belkin54G.” Belkin54G refers to a wireless router, made by the
company Belkin, that broadcasts a wireless signal in a roughly 400 foot radius. Its default setting
has no security. At the second evidentiary hearing, defense expert Robert Young testified that
JH’s laptop would not have automatically connected to Belkin54G the first time she lost her own
wireless signal. Instead, her computer would have sent a signal to search for wireless routers
within range of her computer and the names of available wireless routers would have appeared in
a list on her computer. JH would have clicked on Belkin54G to prompt her computer to connect
to that wireless router. If the wireless router was secured, she would have had to enter a
password to connect to the wireless router. Because the Belkin54G was not secured, JH
connected without entering a password. From that time forward, her computer remembered the
available connection and she did not have to select Belkin54G again when her own wireless
Page 3 - OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS
4. Case 3:08-cr-00468-KI Document 78 Filed 01/17/13 Page 4 of 23 Page ID#: 466
signal failed. Nevertheless, even after that first time, in order to connect to Belkin54G, JH’s
computer needed to send a signal into Ahrndt’s computer and the router’s processor to use the
wireless network.
A Belkin54G router comes with an installation CD containing a manual instructing on the
“importance of security measures,” according to the testimony of Agent Tony Onstad at the first
evidentiary hearing. Tr. of Hr’g on Mot. to Suppress 31: 24-32:1 (Jan. 7, 2010) [59] (hereinafter,
“First Hr’g Tr.”). There is no evidence Ahrndt had read or received this manual. The
government did not introduce the manual itself.
After JH connected to the internet via the Belkin54G wireless network, JH opened her
iTunes software to listen to music. The iTunes software is designed to organize and play audio,
video, and image files. The iTunes software also allows users to browse music and video that is
stored in the iTunes libraries of other computers on the same network, if those libraries are
enabled to “share.” In addition, accepting Young’s testimony, iTunes software installed on one
computer (“computer 2”) integrates with LimeWire installed on another computer (“computer
1”) so that when the two computers are on the same network iTunes will display media on
computer 2 available through LimeWire on computer 1. In this case, when JH opened her
iTunes, she noticed another user’s library–called “Dad’s LimeWire Tunes”–was available for
sharing. Young also testified that the name “Dad’s LimeWire Tunes” was an automatically
generated folder name.
JH opened Dad’s Limewire Tunes and observed files with names that prompted her to
call the Washington County Sheriff’s Office a little before 10:45 p.m. The transcript reflects the
following interaction:
Page 4 - OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS
5. Case 3:08-cr-00468-KI Document 78 Filed 01/17/13 Page 5 of 23 Page ID#: 467
JH: Ok, Um, I just um was looking at my ITunes um and I, you can share
music with people that are I guess in your area and I was just um sharing
some music with this I guess it’s a neighbor of mine, I have no way of
knowing where they are or whatever but it’s a whole bunch of um
underage child pornography. I just wanted somebody to know about that.
Def’s. Ex. 103 (First Hr’g).
She gave her name, address and phone number. When asked, “And how long ago did you get,
receive that?” she answered,
JH: Um, Its up there now. I just turned on my computer and turned on my
Itunes and just saw that I was sharing music so I just checked it and um I
just saw it. I mean I didn’t open any of the stuff but the names are all stuff
about 11 year old girls and 9 year olds you know, just stuff that I don’t it
sounds inappropriate.
Id.
Washington County Deputy John McCullough arrived a little less than an hour later.
Deputy McCullough noted in his police report that JH showed him a “play list of approximately
25 picture and video files. The files had pornographic titles that indicated the images were of
underage children.” Def’s. Ex. 104, at 4 (First Hr’g). At first, they were not able to open the
files or identify an owner. Deputy McCullough called his sergeant. Deputy McCullough
testified at the first suppression hearing that he called his sergeant for two reasons: to advise him
what he had learned and to “determine if it would be appropriate or not for me to look further
into those files and try to determine what was enclosed within them.” First Hr’g Tr. 8:8-12.
After speaking with his supervisor, Deputy McCullough concluded it would be acceptable to
investigate further and he requested that JH attempt to open one of the files.1 The two saw a
1
In his report, Deputy McCullough wrote that while he was talking with his supervisor,
JH informed Deputy McCullough that she could open one of the files. The government concedes,
(continued...)
Page 5 - OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS
6. Case 3:08-cr-00468-KI Document 78 Filed 01/17/13 Page 6 of 23 Page ID#: 468
sexually explicit image of a boy masturbating. JH’s computer then lost the signal and she was
unable to open any other files.
JH informed Deputy McCullough that the Belkin54G showed as an available wireless
network on her computer when she moved in. At that time, only one resident lived in her new
development. She then pointed out an older house nearby, about 150 feet away, which was the
only other home she knew was occupied when she moved in. Deputy McCullough subsequently
ran the license plates of a car in the driveway of that house and learned that defendant John
Henry Ahrndt, a convicted sex offender, lived there. Fredrick Harmon, a friend and tenant of
defendant, also lived at the residence.
Two days later, on February 23, 2007, Washington County Sheriff’s Office Detective Ray
Marcom and Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement,
Senior Special Agent James Cole interviewed JH further about the incident. JH repeated to
Marcom and Cole much of what she had told Deputy McCullough. She also remembered one
file name specifically: “11-yr old masturbating.” She generally remembered words such as
“tiny,” “fuck,” and “cunt,” in conjunction with acronyms indicating age like “5yoa” and “8yoa.”
Def’s. Ex. A, at AHRNDT R004 [25].
Agent Cole also spoke with Deputy McCullough, who could not remember specific
filenames. He nevertheless reported observing that some of the age acronyms in the files, like
“5yoa,” were followed by the words “getting raped” and “being raped.” Id.
On April 2, 2007, Agent Cole applied to United States Magistrate Judge Dennis Hubel for
1
(...continued)
however, that JH was acting as an agent of the government when she opened the image. Gov’t.
Second Resp. 34 [72].
Page 6 - OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS
7. Case 3:08-cr-00468-KI Document 78 Filed 01/17/13 Page 7 of 23 Page ID#: 469
a search warrant to access the Belkin54G wireless network for the purpose of determining the
internet protocol (“IP”) address associated with the router. An IP address would allow
investigators to find out from an internet service provider who owned the Belkin54G wireless
network. Judge Hubel granted the warrant the same day. On April 7, 2007, Agent Cole drove
near the house, accessed the Belkin54G network, and determined the network’s IP address.
Through the American Registry for Internet Numbers, Agent Cole learned that the IP address
belonged to Comcast. He served a summons on Comcast and learned that Ahrndt was the
Comcast subscriber for the IP address in question.
On April 17, 2007, Agent Cole obtained a second search warrant from Judge Hubel
allowing a search of the home for wireless routers, computers, and any files or storage media that
could contain images of child pornography. The next morning officers searched defendant’s
home and seized one tower computer, a Belkin wireless router, various hard drives, numerous
disc media and flash media.
Agents interviewed Ahrndt when they executed the second search warrant. They told him
he was not under arrest and that he was free to leave at any time. Ahrndt stayed and agreed to
speak to the agents. He admitted to downloading child pornography as recently as eight months
previously using the peer-to-peer file-sharing software LimeWire, but that he had deleted any
images he downloaded from that time. Def’s. Ex. A, at AHRNDT R0027 [25]. He also told
agents that he had deleted all the images he had previously obtained, but that they would find
child pornography images if they were capable of recovering deleted images. Specifically, he
told the agents they would find deleted images on his external hard drives, which he had
converted from hard drives of his old computers. He denied, however, that there was any child
Page 7 - OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS
8. Case 3:08-cr-00468-KI Document 78 Filed 01/17/13 Page 8 of 23 Page ID#: 470
pornography on his current computer, which he had obtained from a member of his church in
January 2007. Ahrndt also told agents that no one else used his computer, but that Mr. Harmon,
his friend and tenant, used the wireless network.
A subsequent computer forensic examination of the equipment found 20 images, 17 of
which depicted children engaged in sexually explicit conduct. The first three images were
advertising pages located in an “orphan” file, meaning its parent file had been deleted. The next
four images were located in a Google Hello “scache,” indicating the images had been sent or
transmitted. Image 8 was a .mpg movie that had been viewed in Windows Explorer or by using a
My Computer thumbnail or filmstrip view. Image 9 was a deleted file recovered from Ahrndt’s
computer. The last ten images were deleted files recovered from the USB flash drive. Agent
Cole’s forensic report did not mention LimeWire, any share folder created by LimeWire, or
iTunes.
Ahrndt’s expert Young testified at the second evidentiary hearing that when LimeWire is
installed, the user has the option of directing LimeWire to start automatically when the user logs
into his computer allowing the program to start faster. The default then becomes an automatic
start for LimeWire when the user logs in to his computer, allowing LimeWire to run the entire
time the user is on his computer. Young also explained LimeWire’s default setting is to share
content “on the Local Area Network and make it accessible for Itunes and other Digital Audio
Access Protocol ‘DAAP’ enabled Players.” Def’s. Ex. 101 (Second Hr’g).
There is no evidence Ahrndt was using iTunes or deliberately sharing files. There is
evidence Ahrndt had used LimeWire to download child pornography eight months before, but no
evidence he had set his program to share files over the internet.
Page 8 - OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS
9. Case 3:08-cr-00468-KI Document 78 Filed 01/17/13 Page 9 of 23 Page ID#: 471
Ahrndt brought a motion to suppress all evidence seized after Deputy McCullough’s
initial access of Ahrndt’s files through JH’s computer, on the theory that without Deputy
McCullough’s actions the first and second warrants would not have issued.
LEGAL STANDARDS
The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution establishes the rights of American citizens to
be free from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. U.S. Const. Amend. 4. A
warrantless search is per se unreasonable unless it is justified by an exception to the general rule.
Horton v. California, 496 U.S. 128, 133 (1990).
Private party conduct does not implicate the Fourth Amendment; only activity by
government agents raises Fourth Amendment concerns. United States v. Young, 153 F.3d 1079,
1080 (9th Cir. 1998) (per curiam).
In order to invoke the Fourth Amendment, a defendant must show that his Fourth
Amendment rights have been implicated; that is, he must show a “search” occurred at all before
requiring the government to prove an exception to the warrant requirement. The Ninth Circuit
spelled out the applicable standard in its opinion in this case as follows:
A search occurs when the government violates an individual’s reasonable
expectation of privacy. See United States v. Jacobsen, 466 U.S. 109, 113 (1984).
“An individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy if he can demonstrate a
subjective expectation that his activities would be private, and he [can] show that
his expectation was one that society is prepared to recognize as reasonable.”
United States v. Heckenkamp, 482 F.3d 1142, 1146 (9th Cir. 2007) (internal
quotation marks omitted) (alteration in original). A search also occurs whenever
“the Government obtain information by physically intruding on a constitutionally
protected area.” United States v. Jones, 132 S. Ct. 945, 950 n. 3 (2012).
Page 9 - OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS
10. Case 3:08-cr-00468-KI Document 78 Filed 01/17/13 Page 10 of 23 Page ID#: 472
Ahrndt II, 475 F. App’x at 657.2
DISCUSSION
I. The Private Search
“The Fourth Amendment limits searches conducted by the government, not by a private
party, unless the private party acts as an ‘instrument or agent’ of the government.” Young, 153
F.3d at 1080; United States v. Black, 767 F.2d 1334, 1339 (9th Cir. 1985) (“A wrongful search or
seizure conducted by a private person does not violate the Fourth Amendment,” describing
personal assistant’s disclosure of her employer’s documents when she was not authorized to
disclose them). Here, JH discovered the list of images contained in Ahrndt’s LimeWire folder
while using her own iTunes program and Ahrndt’s unsecured wireless network.
Although I have already concluded JH did nothing illegal, United States v. Ahrndt,
Criminal No. 3:08-468-KI , 2010 WL 373994, at * 8 (D. Or. Jan. 28, 2010) [45] (hereinafter,
Ahrndt I”), even if she had courts have declined to suppress evidence even when it was obtained
by an individual who had no authorization to access the defendant’s computer. See United States
v. Kline, 112 F. App’x 562, 564 (9th Cir. 2004) (private individual searched defendant’s
computer using a “Trojan Horse” computer virus to illegally download files from the infected
computer); see also United States v. Jarrett, 338 F.3d 339 (4th Cir. 2003) (child pornography
recovered via hacker’s actions on computer was not subject to suppression); United States v.
Steiger, 318 F.3d 1039 (11th Cir. 2003) (individual’s access to a computer by hacking not subject
2
Because the search here is a remote search of transmitted data, I reject Ahrndt’s
argument that this was a presumptively unreasonable search inside his home. In addition,
although Ahrndt made the same argument to the Ninth Circuit, the Circuit set out the test I
quoted above for determining whether a search occurred. Appellant Reply Br. 2.
Page 10 - OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS
11. Case 3:08-cr-00468-KI Document 78 Filed 01/17/13 Page 11 of 23 Page ID#: 473
to the Fourth Amendment); see also Walter v. United States, 447 U.S. 649, 656 (1980) (“[A]
wrongful search or seizure conducted by a private party does not violate the Fourth Amendment
and . . . such private wrongdoing does not deprive the government of the right to use evidence
that it has acquired lawfully.”) (plurality opinion). Accordingly, JH’s report of the filenames she
viewed is not subject to suppression.
Although there is a question whether Deputy McCullough could reenact JH’s search by
asking her to connect to Ahrndt’s unsecured wireless network, open her iTunes, and open the
folder called “Dad’s LimeWire Tunes,” as a practical matter Deputy McCullough’s duplication
of JH’s efforts revealed nothing new that would affect my analysis below. I do note that in my
view, under Jacobsen, Deputy McCullough could properly view data on JH’s computer when JH
had previously performed the search. As the Supreme Court explained in Jacobsen, “Once
frustration of the original expectation of privacy occurs, the Fourth Amendment does not prohibit
governmental use of the now-nonprivate information . . . . The Fourth Amendment is implicated
only if the authorities use information with respect to which the expectation of privacy has not
already been frustrated.” 466 U.S. at 117 (reliance on Walters, 447 US. 649 in which private
party opened mis-delivered package). I am not persuaded by Ahrndt’s citation to United States v.
Young, 573 F.3d 711 (9th Cir. 2009), in which the court declined to expand Jacobsen to a search
of a hotel room, deemed equivalent to a private residence; the invasive action at issue here is a
remote search of computer data transmitted on an unsecured wireless network.
I agree with the government, then, that Deputy McCullough saw data on a network that
the private party had previously searched. As a result, Deputy McCullough’s view of the list of
titles in Dad’s LimeWire Tunes did not violate Ahrndt’s Fourth Amendment rights. There would
Page 11 - OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS
12. Case 3:08-cr-00468-KI Document 78 Filed 01/17/13 Page 12 of 23 Page ID#: 474
be no different outcome, however, even if I am wrong about that conclusion and Deputy
McCullough’s recollections of the filenames he saw must be excised from the affidavit.
I next consider whether Deputy McCullough’s additional step of clicking the image, an
action which exceeded the private search, violated Ahrndt’s Fourth Amendment rights.
II. Whether Opening of the Image Violated Ahrndt’s Fourth Amendment Rights
Deputy McCullough directed JH to open an image. She had not previously opened any of
the images. The opened image was no longer within the purview of the private search. I liken
the unopened image to the unviewed films at issue in Walter; in that case, the private party had
not viewed the suspect films and, prior to the agents’ action of watching the films, “one could
only draw inferences about what was on the films. The projection of the films was a significant
expansion of the search that had been conducted previously by a private party and therefore must
be characterized as a separate search.” 447 U.S. at 657. I, furthermore, reject the government’s
argument that the contents were already exposed. Id. at 659 n.13 (“A partial invasion of privacy
cannot automatically justify a total invasion.”).
The next question is whether Deputy McCullough’s action of clicking on the image
violated Ahrndt’s Fourth Amendment rights. In order to assess Ahrndt’s Fourth Amendment
rights, I must evaluate whether any subjective expectation of privacy was objectively reasonable.
As the Ninth Circuit pointed out, my previous opinion incorrectly framed the issue as whether it
is reasonable to have an expectation of privacy in the contents of a shared iTunes library on a
personal computer connected to an unsecured home wireless network. In fact, the issue is
whether it is reasonable to have an expectation of privacy in the contents of a LimeWire file,
Page 12 - OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS
13. Case 3:08-cr-00468-KI Document 78 Filed 01/17/13 Page 13 of 23 Page ID#: 475
when there is no evidence of intentional sharing over the wireless network or the internet, on a
personal computer connected to an unsecured home wireless network.
As an initial matter, I conclude Ahrndt’s reasonable expectation of privacy in the contents
of his computer was not eliminated when he attached it to his unsecured wireless network router.
Indeed, as the court stated in Heckenkamp, “the mere act of accessing a network does not in itself
extinguish privacy expectations, nor does the fact that others may have occasional access to the
computer.” 482 F.3d at 1146-47 (citing Leventhal v. Knapek, 266 F.3d 64, 74 (2d Cir. 2001)).
It is true the Heckenkamp court went on to comment that privacy expectations may be
reduced if the user is advised the information may not remain confidential or communications
may be monitored. Here, with respect to Ahrndt’s Belkin54G wireless router, the default setting
was unsecured. The quick set-up manual did not discuss security measures that could or should
be taken. Although defense counsel stipulated the router came with a manual, and the
government’s expert testified the manual included detailed instructions on setting up wireless
security, the only evidence in the record is that the manual warned of the importance of security.
I underscore there is no evidence the manual warned Ahrndt that the content of files may be
accessible to others, as opposed to just internet access, by failing to secure his router.
Accordingly, although Ahrndt’s failure to secure his network suggests a lesser subjective
expectation of privacy, I could not say he lost all expectation of privacy in the contents of files on
his personal computer.
The situation is, of course, a bit more complicated; the evidence suggests the content
became available to JH by virtue of the fact that the materials were contained in a LimeWire
folder. Nevertheless, although the folder appearing in JH’s iTunes directory was called “Dad’s
Page 13 - OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS
14. Case 3:08-cr-00468-KI Document 78 Filed 01/17/13 Page 14 of 23 Page ID#: 476
LimeWire Tunes,” there is no evidence Ahrndt was sharing files on the peer-to-peer network, and
the government concedes there is no evidence the image in Dad’s LimeWire Tunes library that
JH and Deputy McCullough opened was accessible over the internet by LimeWire users at the
time JH and Deputy McCullough accessed the files, or at any time prior. Accordingly, I could
not say Ahnrdt had no right to privacy in those files just by virtue of his use of LimeWire to
download images. Cf. United States v. Ganoe, 538 F.3d 1117, 1127 (9th Cir. 2008) (denying
defendant’s motion to suppress evidence on the ground the defendant had installed file sharing
software on his computer and was “explicitly warned before completing the installation that the
folder into which files are downloaded would be shared with other users in the peer-to-peer
network”).
Instead, accepting Young’s testimony, the evidence suggests LimeWire was likely
configured to run whenever Ahrndt turned his computer on. The evidence also suggests the
program was set to its default mode of sharing content on Ahrndt’s “Local Area Network”
making that content “accessible for Itunes and other Digital Audio Access Protocol (DAAP)
enabled Players.” Def’s. Ex. 101 (Second Hr’g). As a technical matter, with respect to the
content itself, Young could not say whether iTunes was asking, “Anything to share?” or
LimeWire was advertising that it had content to share. Regardless, in order to preclude
LimeWire from sharing with iTunes on his network, Ahrndt would have had to seek out and
uncheck the sharing option, or choose to require a password for those wishing to access the
contents of his LimeWire file. Accordingly, in response to the Ninth Circuit’s query, there is no
evidence Ahrndt “intentionally” enabled sharing of his files over his wireless network. Ahrndt II,
475 F. App’x at 658. Rather, as Young explained, JH’s iTunes software could detect files that
Page 14 - OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS
15. Case 3:08-cr-00468-KI Document 78 Filed 01/17/13 Page 15 of 23 Page ID#: 477
were shared, by default, by Ahrndt’s LimeWire program. The government offered no evidence to
dispute Young’s testimony.
The government suggests Ahrndt had no objective expectation of privacy as a result of
the automated computer process that shared his folder, but I find the government’s supporting
case citations inapt. The government first quotes extensively from the dissent’s opinion in Lavan
v. City of Los Angeles, 693 F.3d 1022, 1038-39 (9th Cir. 2012). The only other Ninth Circuit
case referenced by the government is United States v. Borowy, 595 F.3d 1045 (9th Cir. 2010) (per
curiam), but in that case the agent found the images via the internet by browsing the shared
content stored in defendant’s LimeWire file. Although the defendant had attempted to prevent
LimeWire from sharing his files over the internet, his “subjective intention . . . did not create an
objectively reasonable expectation of privacy in the face of such widespread public access.” 595
F.3d at 1048 (emphasis added); compare United States v. Sawyer, 786 F. Supp. 2d 1352, 1356
(N. D. Ohio 2011) (somewhat more reasonable expectation of privacy in content shared with
“friends” over an open program, but no control over manner in which “friends” used their access,
so no objective expectation of privacy). Here, the evidence suggests Ahrndt unknowingly, and
by default of the program, shared the content stored in his LimeWire folder over his home
wireless network. This was not the widespread public access found to have undermined
Borowy’s expectation of privacy.
Finally, both United States v. Procopio, 88 F.3d 21 (1st Cir. 1996), and United States v.
O’Bryant, 775 F.2d 1528, 1534 (11th Cir. 1985), involved unintended disclosures of private
documents as a result of third party actions, thereby destroying any objective expectation of
privacy. Neither case is persuasive. In Procopio, a private party stole a safe, leaving it open in a
Page 15 - OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS
16. Case 3:08-cr-00468-KI Document 78 Filed 01/17/13 Page 16 of 23 Page ID#: 478
park with papers inside and outside the safe, but the officer did not exceed the scope of the
private search as Deputy McCullough did here. In O’Bryant, an officer found a stolen briefcase
next to a dumpster and the court explained that abandoned valuable property may be inspected to
determine the identity of the owner and to inventory the contents. Finally, both of these cases
arose outside the Ninth Circuit.
In short, the government does not dispute a person has a reasonable expectation of
privacy in the files on his home personal computer. There is no evidence Ahrndt was using
iTunes software or any other program to deliberately share files. The evidence is that he had
media-enabled files that JH was able to view using her own iTunes program because Ahrndt’s
files made themselves available, by default, through JH’s iTunes. There is no evidence Ahrndt
intentionally enabled sharing of his files over his wireless network, and there is no evidence he
knew or should have known that others could access his files by connecting to his wireless
network. Deputy McCullough’s action of clicking on the image in JH’s iTunes directory to open
the image violated Ahrndt’s Fourth Amendment rights. His description of the image, and any
related tainted evidence, must be stricken from Agent Cole’s affidavit.
III. Single Purpose Container
The government justifies Deputy McCullough’s additional click under the “single-
purpose container” exception to the warrant requirement. Specifically,
[n]ot all containers and packages found by police during the course of a search
will deserve the full protection of the Fourth Amendment. Thus, some containers
(for example a kit of burglar tools or a gun case) by their very nature cannot
support any reasonable expectation of privacy because their contents can be
inferred from their outward appearance.
Page 16 - OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS
17. Case 3:08-cr-00468-KI Document 78 Filed 01/17/13 Page 17 of 23 Page ID#: 479
United States v. Gust, 405 F.3d 797, 800 (9th Cir. 2005) (quoting Arkansas v. Sanders, 442 U.S.
753, 764 n.13 (1979)). Ultimately, “to fall within the [single-purpose container] exception of
[Sanders] a container must so clearly announce its contents, whether by its distinctive
configuration, its transparency, or otherwise, that its contents are obvious to an observer.” Id. at
801. This evaluation is made “from the objective viewpoint of a layperson.” Id. According to
the government, the file names alone announced their content. It relies on the district court’s
decision in Borowy, which concluded, “Here, the filenames are explicit enough that the container
is such that its contents may be said to be in plain view. Therefore, [the agent’s] viewing of the
files’ content did not require a warrant.” 577 F. Supp. 2d 1133 (D. Nev. 2008), aff’d, 595 F.3d
1045 (9th Cir. 2010) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
The Ninth Circuit did not comment on the single purpose use exception in affirming the
district court opinion in Borowy, 595 F.3d 1045 (upholding decision; no search occurred because
defendant had used peer-to-peer software to share images). Absent more compelling authority, I
do not accept the government’s invocation of the single purpose container exception particularly
when I have relied on the opposite argument made in other cases. See United States v.
Kowalczyk, Criminal No. 3:08-95-KI, 2012 WL 3201975, at *24, (D. Or. Aug. 3, 2012)
(accepting government’s argument that, in executing a warrant, an investigator acted
appropriately in opening images of child pornography while looking for identity theft and fraud
because file names may be inaccurate and can be changed); see also United States v. Giberson,
527 F.3d 882, 889 (9th Cir. 2008) (“computer records are extremely susceptible to tampering,
hiding, or destruction”).
Page 17 - OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS
18. Case 3:08-cr-00468-KI Document 78 Filed 01/17/13 Page 18 of 23 Page ID#: 480
IV. Whether the Affidavit Contains Probable Cause After Excising the Opened Image
The government contends that even if Deputy McCullough had not asked JH to open a
single file, their observations of the file names displayed openly in JH’s iTunes library were
sufficient to establish the existence of probable child pornography sufficient to support a warrant
to search.
Probable cause exists when there is a “fair probability” of “finding evidence considering
the type of crime, the nature of the items sought, the suspect’s opportunity for concealment and
normal inferences about where a criminal might hide stolen property,” or the fruits of his crime.
United States v. Parks, 285 F.3d 1133, 1142 (9th Cir. 2002).
Without JH or Deputy McCullough’s description of the single image they viewed, the
magistrate would have only the following statements made by Agent Cole in his affidavit:
–“JH noted that approximately 25 to 30 of the file names had file names indicating that
the file may be child pornography.” Def’s. Ex. 106, Cole Aff. ¶ 10 (First Hr’g).
–“Deputy McCullough, duplicating what JH had already done, viewed the library list of
Dad’s Limewire Tunes and observed approximately 25 pictures and video files which had
pornographic titles that indicated the files were of underage children.” Id.
–When interviewed later, JH “could not specifically recall any other file names [other
than the one she had opened].” She remembered that the file names included ages such as “5
yoa, . . . 8 yoa and 9 yoa. JH stated that none of the files had ages higher than 11 years old. JH
also noted the words: “Tiny,” “fuck,” “sick” and “cunt” in the file names. JH believed that
based on the filenames she observed that the filenames contained child pornography which is the
reason that JH contacted law enforcement.” Id. at ¶ 12.
Page 18 - OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS
19. Case 3:08-cr-00468-KI Document 78 Filed 01/17/13 Page 19 of 23 Page ID#: 481
–Deputy McCullough also could not remember specific filenames. He remembered
seeing 25 filenames “which purported by their filenames to be files related to the sexual abuse of
children.” Id. at ¶ 15. He remembered the filenames “contained what appeared to be children’s
ages including 8 yoa, 9 yoa, 10 yoa and 11 yoa. Deputy McCullough stated that the filenames
described sexual activity after the age such as ‘being raped’ and ‘getting raped.’ Deputy
McCullough believed based on the filenames that the files depicted child pornography.” Id.3
The government concedes file names are not always definitive as to their contents, but
argues the names viewed by JH and Deputy McCullough were highly indicative of child
pornography. It cites two cases in support of its theory. The first, United States v. Miknevich,
upheld a warrant affidavit based on a single file name, a confirmation that a different officer later
viewed the contents, and a computerized file analysis. According to the court, “[t]he
unmistakable inference which arises from the file name . . . is that its contents include material
pertaining to the sexual exploitation of children” and because a computerized file analysis
indicated the contents may have included child pornography. 638 F.3d 178, 185 (3rd Cir. 2011).
The government concedes there was no computerized file analysis here, but the magistrate had
multiple file names with similar titles, suggesting the files were what they said they were. The
other case the government cites, United States v. Battershell, relied on a girlfriend’s complaint
that the computer contained photos of “kids having sex” and law enforcement officers’ brief
descriptions of two photographs they had viewed: a “young female (8-10 YOA)” and “another
3
I do not accept Ahrndt’s speculation that JH and Deputy McCullough’s recollections of
the filenames were tainted by their view of the single image, requiring the excision of paragraphs
11, 12 and 15 in their entirety. Other than JH’s memory of the single file name, which matched
the image she viewed, there is no evidence of taint and none is obviously apparent.
Page 19 - OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS
20. Case 3:08-cr-00468-KI Document 78 Filed 01/17/13 Page 20 of 23 Page ID#: 482
young female having sexual intercourse.” 457 F.3d 1048, 1053 (9th Cir. 2006). This was enough
for probable cause. The government argues that, here, seeing the actual image is an added
benefit, but suggests probable cause may be satisfied where 25 to 30 files describe sexual acts
found in the file sharing software LimeWire.
Ahrndt concedes a magistrate may have authorized the first search warrant to obtain
Ahrndt’s IP address based on JH’s and Deputy McCullough’s general assertions. He argues,
however, lacking specific titles and the description of an image, a magistrate would never have
authorized police to invade Ahrndt’s home and search his personal computer.
I agree with Ahrndt. As an initial matter, the Ninth Circuit has described several
acceptable ways for an affiant to show the existence of contraband images. The “ideal course” is
to provide copies of the alleged pornographic photographs for the magistrate to view, but failing
to include such pictures is not “fatal to the warrant[.]” United States v. Smith, 795 F.2d 841, 847
(9th Cir. 1986). Alternatively, a magistrate may rely on an experienced officer’s “factual
descriptions of an image.” Battershell, 457 F.3d at 1053 (officer described in his police report
the images he had personally viewed and the report was appended to forensic investigator’s
affidavit);4 New York v. P.J. Video, Inc., 475 U.S. 868, 874 n.5 (1986) (“reasonably specific
affidavit describing the content of a film generally provides an adequate basis for the magistrate
to determine whether there is probable cause to believe that the film is obscene, and whether a
warrant authorizing the seizure of the film should issue”). Finally, absent any description of the
4
In that case, for example, the government conceded a description of “a young female (8-
10 YOA) naked in a bathtub” was “insufficient to establish probable cause that the photograph
lasciviously exhibited the genitals or pubic area” of the minor, one of the statutory definitions for
“sexually explicit conduct.” Battershell, 457 F.3d at 1051.
Page 20 - OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS
21. Case 3:08-cr-00468-KI Document 78 Filed 01/17/13 Page 21 of 23 Page ID#: 483
images, a magistrate may rely on an experienced affiant’s representation that the photographs he
viewed meet the statute’s criteria. Smith, 795 F.2d at 848 (magistrate could rely on statement of
“experienced postal inspector that the photos depicted ‘sexually explicit conduct’ within the
statute”).
The government has not offered any authority where a partial recollection of file names
provided sufficient probable cause. The cases cited by the government had more than a
description of file names. Miknevich had the “digital fingerprint” supporting the assertion that
the image was child pornography. 638 F.3d at 185. Battershell had the statement from a witness
that she had seen the images on her boyfriend’s computer and described them as “kids having
sex.” 457 F.3d at 1052. Although I recognize probable cause means a fair probability and “not
certainty or even a preponderance of the evidence,” given the dearth of case authority I am loathe
to find probable cause here absent a view of one image. United States v. Gourde, 440 F.3d 1065,
1069 (9th Cir. 2006) (en banc). Ahrndt suggests instead, and I agree, the deputy should have
obtained a warrant to open one of the images. The partial recollections and characterizations of
the file names JH and Deputy McCullough saw were too general to support the issuance of a
warrant to enter Ahrndt’s home and seize his computer and related equipment.
V. Whether the Deputy’s Actions were Reasonable, Making Suppression Unwarranted
The government argues Deputy McCullough had no idea the files came from somewhere
entitled to Fourth Amendment protection, making suppression unwarranted. The government’s
argument goes like this: the content was viewed by JH and the deputy on JH’s computer, using
her network connection, in her residence, using her iTunes program with her permission, and the
network on which they viewed the content provided no indication as to the source, or that the
Page 21 - OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS
22. Case 3:08-cr-00468-KI Document 78 Filed 01/17/13 Page 22 of 23 Page ID#: 484
source was one that was of a type that would receive Fourth Amendment protections. Indeed, the
name that appeared in JH’s iTunes playlist did not indicate a privacy interest or ownership
interest (not like “Dad’s Medical Records” or “Dad’s Tax Records”). Instead, according to the
government, the name invited inspection–Dad’s Limewire Tunes. JH did not have to seek out
Ahnrdt’s network; it broadcast its signal and “essentially invited association[.]” Gov’t. Second
Resp. 10 [72]. The government argues it was not known to the officers that the wireless signal
came from another home until the officers got the address two months later from Comcast.
As an initial matter, I reject the government’s recitation of the facts. The facts, as
adduced at the evidentiary hearing and as reflected in Deputy McCullough’s reports, are that JH
knew the unsecured wireless signal was resonating from a place in her neighborhood. There is
no description of any public place in her neighborhood from which the signal could be
emanating. Rather, she and Deputy McCullough identified two places from which the signal
could be emanating, both of which were residences. Contrary to the government’s assertion, this
evidence indicates Deputy McCullough more than likely knew he was directing JH to open a file
on a computer in a private neighbor’s residence. His testimony confirms he called his supervisor
for guidance, also suggesting he knew he needed to be cautious in proceeding.
The government relies on Herring v. United States, 555 U.S. 135 (2009), United States v.
Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 906 (1984), and Illinois v. Krull, 480 U.S. 340, 347 (1987), for the
proposition that where there is no police misconduct to deter, suppressing the evidence is
improper. It argues Deputy McCullough did not evince any deliberate, reckless, or grossly
negligent disregard for Ahrndt’s Fourth Amendment rights. All of what the government says
may be true, but “[t]he good faith exception does not apply where a search warrant is issued on
Page 22 - OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS
23. Case 3:08-cr-00468-KI Document 78 Filed 01/17/13 Page 23 of 23 Page ID#: 485
the basis of evidence obtained as the result of an illegal search.” United States v. Wanless, 882
F.2d 1459, 1466 (9th Cir. 1989); United States v. Song Ja Cha, 597 F.3d 995 (9th Cir. 2010)
(Ninth Circuit cases holding that the good faith exception does not apply to mistakes of law are
still good law after Herring).
I decline to apply the good faith exception to save the warrant here.
VI. Supreme Court Case United States v. Jones
The Ninth Circuit asked me to consider whether the analysis in United States v. Jones,
132 S. Ct. 945 (2012) directed suppression. Since I find suppression is warranted under the
framework set forth above, I need not address this issue.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, Ahrndt’s Motion to Suppress evidence obtained from his
storage media and the statements he made to the agents is GRANTED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this 17th day of January, 2013.
/s/ Garr M. King
Garr M. King
United States District Judge
Page 23 - OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS