31 F. Supp. 3d 159
D.D.C.2014Background
- Government sought Rule 41 search/seizure warrant for Apple iPhone 4 in Milzman ricin investigation; Attachment B lists seized data and a new Forensic Analysis section lacks detailed methodologies; Court previously required a search protocol to limit data outside scope; prior March 18, 2014 Georgetown warrant allowed separate search of device contents; government provided later Attachment B but scope still not sufficiently particularized; Court concerns center on probable cause and particularity under Fourth Amendment; matter denied without prejudice pending a proper search protocol and limitation of dataSearch
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the warrant lacks particularity and probable cause | Milzman | Government | Denied for lack of a search protocol |
| Whether a search protocol is required to limit data outside the scope | Government | Milzman | Denied without prejudice pending protocol |
| Whether data outside scope would be retained or destroyed | Government | Milzman | Solved in part; not yet accepted without protocol |
Key Cases Cited
- Maryland v. Garrison, 480 U.S. 79 (1987) (description of search scope under Fourth Amendment)
- Coolidge v. N.H., 403 U.S. 443 (1971) (probable cause and particularity requirements)
- United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798 (1982) (scope of search based on probable cause to search particular place)
- Dalia v. United States, 441 U.S. 238 (1979) (procedural execution of warrants need not specify methods to be used)
- In re Search Black iPhone, 2014 WL 1045812 (D.D.C. 2014) (relevant to overbroad data seizure issue (not official reporter))
- In re Search of Odys Loox, 2014 WL 1063996 (D.D.C. 2014) (requires search protocol consideration (not official reporter))
- United States v. Burgess, 576 F.3d 1078 (10th Cir. 2009) (narrowing searches in physical world analogies)
- United States v. Schesso, 730 F.3d 1040 (9th Cir. 2013) (over-seizing risk in electronic searches; need for protocol)
- United States v. Comprehensive Drug Testing, Inc., 621 F.3d 1162 (9th Cir. 2010) (en banc; limits on data seizure in electronic searches)
- Tamura v. United States, 694 F.2d 591 (9th Cir. 1982) (principles on wholesale seizure and need for specificity)
- In re Search Warrant, 71 A.3d 1158 (Vt. 2012) (ex ante restrictions on search warrants based on 'region' specification)