McCarty
United States v. McCarty
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…