Conviction for receiving and possessing child pornography is affirmed where: 1) the district court did not err in denying the motion to suppress based on challenge to the validity of search warrant, as even if the warrant application had disclosed the defendant was present in the secretly recorded videos, the magistrate could reasonably assume that a probability of criminal conduct was shown based on invasion of privacy when the video was taken of others in the nude; 2) the warrant was not facially overbroad in allowing a search of storage of digital images; and 3) police did not unlawfully expand the scope of the invasion-of-privacy search into a search of child pornography, and the items were lawfully seized pursuant to the plain-view exception to the warrant requirement.
Read US v. Alexander, No. 08-2261
Appellate InformationAppeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri.Submitted: January 15, 2009Filed: July 20, 2009
JudgesBefore LOKEN, Chief Judge, WOLLMAN and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.Opinion by SHEPHERD, Circuit Judge.
You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help
Civil Rights
Block on Trump’s Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
Criminal
Judges Can Release Secret Grand Jury Records
Politicians Can’t Block Voters on Facebook, Court Rules
