Computer Search Approved

U.S. v. Grimmett, 2006 WL 574420 (3/10/06) - No additional search warrant was required to authorize search of the defendant's computer where the warrant affidavit asked to be able to search the computer and noted the need for careful examination of the computer and the warrant sought seizure of the computer and referred to the warrant affidavit. This case was not like U.S. v. Carey, 172 F.3d 1268 (10th Cir. 1999), where the officers searched pursuant to a drug warrant and then proceeded to look for child porn. Here, the officers acted pursuant to a child porn warrant. Besides, "we have adopted a somewhat forgiving stance when faced with a particularity challenge to a warrant authorizing the seizure of computers" How very kind of the 10th to be so forgiving.

The computer search was not an impermissible general search. The officer only looked at files that had certain file extensions, such as "jpg," that indicated the files had images. The warrant was sufficiently particularized regarding the search for non-computer-related property, such as videotapes, because the warrant limited the officers to searching such items that were related to child porn.

18 U.S.C. § 2251(a) is a proper exercise of the interstate commerce clause facially and as applied to the defendant's intrastate production of child porn. The 10th followed U.S. v. Jeronimo-Bautista, 425 F.3d 1266 (10th Cir. 2005), which rejected a similar as-applied challenge. The intrastate production of child porn is a commercial activity that Congress could rationally conclude could affect interstate commerce.