Circuit Snippets

The U.S. District Court in Middle District Pennsylvania concluded that the private-search doctrine did not authorize law enforcement officers to copy a computer's hard drive and scan all of its contents after a private person found evidence of possible crimes in a few files. In this case, the landlord put the defendant's possessions, including his computer, on the curb after defendant failed to pay his rent. Someone else took possession of (stole?) the computer, found what the person thought might be child porn, and in an excess of community zeal, deleted the files and told the police, who then searched all the files. The district court rejected the government's argument that the hard drive was a "single container" and held that the government's search exceeded the scope of the third party's search. There's an interesting discussion of how hard disks work. US v. Crist, No. 1:07-cr-211 (M.D. Pa, 10/22/08)

The 9th Circuit held that, when determining whether a prior conviction qualified as a crime of violence to support a sentencing enhancement, the court could rely on facts in a California "minute order". US v. Snellenberger, en banc., No. 06-50169, on rehearing 480 F.3d 1187 (9th Cir. 10/28/08)

The Fifth Circuit struck down a condition of probation that allowed the crack defendant to reside only with blood relatives and her spouse as overbroad. US v. Woods, No. 0751491 (5th Cir. 10/28/08)

A defendant who seeks to withdraw a guilty plea before sentencing based on the claim that his previous counsel failed to tell him about a possible suppression motion is entitled to an evidentiary hearing, the 9th Cir. held. US v. McTiernan, No. 07-50430 (9th Cir. 10/21/08)

A district court can require a defendant who is representing himself to have stand-by counsel at the counsel table without violating the defendant's sixth amendment rights, the D.C. Circuit held. Hill v. US, No. 05-CF-588 (D.C. Cir. 10/30/08)

The mere fact that a defendant may have refurbished and sold some guns does not disqualify him from receiving the benefit of the reduction under USSG 2K2.1(b)(2) as a collector. However, the guideline applies only when "all" the guns are for sporting or collection purposes, and the defendant admitted to keeping one of the guns for security, so, no reduction. US v. Miller, No. 08-1069 (7th Cir. 10/27/08)

The district court could properly enhance the defendant's sentence based on the fact he was a cop at the time he participated in a drug conspiracy, the 1st Cir. held. The court emphasized this was not an abstract rule justifying a general enhancement for every cop who is convicted of such a crime; this defendant actually wore his uniform while dealing drugs and thus set "a very bad example." US v. Arroyo, No. 07-2423 (1st Cir. 10/27/08)