State v. Gurule, 303 P.3d 838

Special Agent Kinch investigated online child-pornography distribution via Gnutella and identified a subscriber at 1520 University Blvd NE, Apt. 215, Albuquerque.
A subpoena to Comcast linked the IP address to Defendant Davis; a warrant sought to seize and view child-pornography evidence and related computer equipment at the apartment.
The warrant permitted seizure of digital cameras and computer equipment; officers seized two cameras, including a Sony Cybershot, at the residence.
A search of the Sony Cybershot memory revealed images of Gurule with his four-year-old granddaughter, forming the basis for charges against Gurule.
Defendants moved to suppress the camera seizure, excluding Stevens’ testimony, and limiting Robert’s testimony; the Court of Appeals upheld suppression of Stevens’ testimony and held the Davis-Robert statement testimonial, leading to certiorari.
The Supreme Court granted review to address probable cause to seize the camera, exclusion under fruit of the poisonous tree, and Confrontation Clause issues regarding the Davis-Robert statement.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Probable cause to seize the digital camera	GKC argues probable cause existed due to camera nexus to child exploitation	Defendants contend no nexus or probable cause for camera search	Probable cause found; camera seizure justified
Fruit of the poisonous tree—Stevens testimony	State argues Stevens’ testimony tainted by illegal search should be admitted	Exclusion appropriate since derived from unlawful seizure	Overruled; Stevens’ testimony admissible to the extent allowed by law
Confrontation and Bruton issues with Davis-Robert statement	State asserts non-testimonial and Bruton issue not applicable	Statement is testimonial or Bruton implicated	Statement deemed non-testimonial; Bruton issue remanded for evidentiary ruling; confrontation concerns addressed on remand

State v. Williamson, 2009-NMSC-039 (NMSC 2009) (probable cause standard and affidavit sufficiency)
State v. Evans, 2009-NMSC-027 (NMSC 2009) (probable cause and place-based search analysis)
State v. Haidle, 2012-NMSC-033 (NMSC 2012) (substantial basis standard for probable cause)
State v. Vest, 2011-NMCA-037 (NMCA 2011) (scope of warrant and containers within permitted area)
State v. Trujillo, 2011-NMSC-040 (NMSC 2011) (standard of review for probable cause; deference to warrant)
Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (Supreme Court 2004) (definition of testimonial statements; confrontation rights)
Michigan v. Bryant, 562 U.S. __, 131 S. Ct. 1143 (Supreme Court 2011) (contextual evaluation of whether statements are testimonial)
Davis v. Washington, 547 U.S. 813 (Supreme Court 2006) (non-testimonial nature of some statements; framework for confrontation analysis)
Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123 (Supreme Court 1968) (co-defendant confession and confrontation risk)
United States v. Gleich, 397 F.3d 608 (8th Cir. 2005) (second-warrant necessity when camera evidence may be tied to computer data)
State v. Hinahara, 2007-NMCA-116 (NMCA 2007) (probable cause to search containers within permitted area)