Dashboard > Ira's Law Gear > Home > US vs. Brent Ray Brooks 04-4255 Oct 26 2005
  Ira's Law Gear Log In | Sign Up   View a printable version of the current page.  
 
US vs. Brent Ray Brooks 04-4255 Oct 26 2005
   
Google
Added by Garnet R. Chaney, last edited by Garnet R. Chaney on Apr 08, 2007  (view change)
Labels: 

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Brent Ray BROOKS, Defendant-Appellant
No 04-4255
October 26, 2005
Jurisdiction: United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
Date: October 26, 2005
Keywords: Constitutionality, Computer Forensixcs, Admissibility

Defendant was convicted because of images found during a search of his computer. The computer was manually searched by police and the police laboratory forensically searched Defendant's computers, compact disks and diskettes.

Defendants motions to suppress evidence were denied, and the Defendant appealed.

Law enforcement offers obtained and executed a search warrant to search Defendant's home, including computer equipment, for child pornography. The Defendant

  • signed a search consent form,
  • consented to the use of a "pre-search" disk on his computers, including a "pre-search for child pornography",
  • had been advised of his right to refuse consent.
  • gave consent vluntarily
  • authorized agents to take any items they felt were related to their investigation

The "pre-search" disk failed to function, so the officer manually searched the computer's images files. Officer found several images of adolescent boys engaged in search activity, whereupon police siezed the computers. Police obtained a third warrant authorizing search of three computers, 12 CDs, and seven diskettes found at the Defendants house.

Defendant tried to argue that police went beyond the scope of consent by searching the computer in a way different from what they had disclosed.

The court found that the Defendant understoof the search was for pornographic images, and had consented to the search.

Court also determined that the particularity requirement of the Fourth Amendment does not require the government to lay out it's specific search methodology.


This case is from the Case Digest in

Cover of ISBN 1590316703The Electronic Evidence and Discovery Handbook
  • Forms
  • Checklists
  • Guidelines
  • by Sharon D. Nelson, Bruce A. Olson, and John W. Simek
  • Over 200 cases summarized on CD
  • Helpful information and commentary
  • Templates for e-discovery requests
  • Planning effective e-Discovery strategy
Powered by Atlassian Confluence, the Enterprise Wiki. (Version: 2.4.3 Build:#705 Mar 21, 2007) - Bug/feature request - Contact Administrators
Complete Wiki Notation Guide