Hill

United States v. Hill

Good Law
322 F. Supp. 2d 1081·2004 WL 1376369·2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11116
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaJune 17, 2004CR 02-01289 AKCalifornia5,714 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kozinski, J.

Defendant has been indicted on one count of possession of child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(5)(B). He brings a series of pre-trial motions, raising the following issues: What must an affidavit allege to establish probable cause that images on a defendant’s computer are child pornography? Is a warrant over-broad if it permits seizure of computer media without requiring that they be inspected at the scene? If it doesn’t define the search methodology? Finally, are defense counsel and his expert entitled to copies of the computer media the government seized from defendant’s home?

Facts

Á computer technician was repairing defendant’s computer when she discovered what she believed to be child pornography. She called Long Beach police, and the detective who took the call obtained a search warrant from a judge of the Long Beach Superior Court. The warrant authorized a search of the computer repair store and seizure of the computer, any work orders relating to the computer, “[a]ll storage media belonging to either [the computer] or the individual identifying himself as [defendant] at the location,” and “[a]ll sexually explicit images depicting minor[s]…

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.