Summary
United States v Comprehensive Drug Testing Inc 09 C.D.S.11022.
In this case the 9th Circuit sets forth an extension of the Fourth Amendment to the 21st Century.
The cited case restricts the "Plain View Doctrine" in searches of computer based information.
Analysis
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals opinion states that "When as here, the government comes into possession of evidence by circumventing or willfully disregarding limitations in a search warrant, it must not be allowed to benefit from its own wrongdoing by retaining the wrongfully obtained evidence or any fruits thereof."
Background
As many of us know following a 2002 agreement with the Players Union, MLB instituted drug testing in a process that was supposed to be anonymous. Federal agents learned the names of 10 players and obtained a search warrant for the drug testing records.
In the process of executing the warrant agents seized swaths of drug test results, that contained information about more people, players and non-players than allowed in the warrant. The government proceeded to review the entire set of records including those of individuals not covered by the search warrant.
Ramifications
Chief Judge Alex Kozinski went beyond just the steroids case expanding the decision, addressing the in plain view doctrine as it applies to government searches of computer files. Judge Kozinski acknowledged that in conducting computer file searches that agents and prosecutors may open files that are not necessarily relevant in executing a search warrant. However, when the government comes across incriminating evidence/materials outside the scope of a warrant, the government attempts to legalize discovery under the plain view exception.
Judge Kozinski's position is that this tactic renders limiting language in a search warrant meaningless.
The Court (divided) recommends that magistrate judges force prosecutors to renounce the plain view doctrine when it comes to data searches, or require more impartial computer specialists to search data before agents and prosecutors get their hand on it.
Judges Andrew Kleinfield and Milan Smith Jr. supported these measures. Judge Carlos Bea, agreed with the result in the steroids case but took issue with the broader language on the plain view doctrine. Judges Consuelo Callahan and Sandra Ikuta dissented.
The Court has taken a step toward bringing jurisprudence into the 21st Century, based on the overreaching by government agents and lawyers.
This author consults with leading institutions through GLG
Analyses are solely the work of the authors and have not been edited or endorsed by GLG.
