United States v. Santiago Martinez

MEMORANDUM

Santiago Velazquez Martinez appeals his conviction, specifically challenging the denial of his motion to suppress. We affirm.

We review the district court’s denial of a motion to suppress de novo and review underlying findings of fact for clear error. United States v. Rodgers, 656 F.3d 1023, 1026 (9th Cir.2011). Whether an individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy in property is a question of law reviewed de novo. United States v. Heckenkamp, 482 F.3d 1142, 1146 (9th Cir.2007).

The motion concerned evidence garnered from shared files made available via peer-to-peer (“P2P”) software. This case does not differ significantly from United States v. Ganoe, 538 F.3d 1117 (9th Cir.2008) and United States v. Borowy, 595 F.3d 1045 (9th Cir.2010). In Ganoe , we held that a person using a P2P network had no reasonable expectation of privacy in files shared when there is a warning given. Ganoe, 538 F.3d at 1126 . Martinez received a warning that his files would be made public to anyone on the network if stored in his shared folder. The point of “shared” file is that they can be viewed and obtained by others, meaning that Martinez could not reasonably have expected them…