McCarty

United States v. McCarty

Bad Law
648 F.3d 820·2011 WL 3319428·2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 15905
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 3, 201109-10504California9,833 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hawkins, J.

ORDER

The government’s Motion to Amend footnote 6 in the Opinion that is cited at 648 F.3d 820 , 2011 WL 3319428 (9th Cir. August 3, 2011) is granted, but only for the limited purpose of amending the third sentence of footnote 6 to read: “On appeal, the government did not contend this search of the second bag was a lawful administrative search or contest suppression of any evidence found therein on a basis independent of its main arguement.”

No subsequent petitions for rehearing or rehearing en banc will be accepted for filing.

OPINION

The competing interests of personal privacy and the safety of the traveling public are at the heart of this interlocutory government appeal from the district court’s suppression of all evidence obtained as a result of an airport search of defendant Simon McCarty’s (“McCarty”) checked luggage at Hilo International Airport. The government argues the evidence from McCarty’s bag — which included, among other things, almost five dozen photographs of nude and partially nude minors, children’s underwear and pajama advertisements, and handwritten notes describ ing the molestation of children — was discovered during the course of a properly limited…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.