State v. White, 2017 ND 51

Jesse White was on supervised probation with a condition permitting searches of his person, vehicle, or residence.
White’s girlfriend reported finding provocative images of young girls and that White was uploading pictures to a phone with no service.
Probation officer and police went to White’s residence, were told they would search for images on computers/phones, and located cell phones and a laptop identified by White as his.
Officers observed a folder with Facebook login info for "Jesse White" and "Ashley Black," pornographic DVDs (including "Barely Legal"), and on-phone images of young girls including at least one topless prepubescent female; a warrant was later obtained and forensic analysis confirmed additional images of unclothed young females.
White was charged under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-27.2-04.1 (possession of prohibited materials), moved to suppress the phone evidence, was denied, convicted by a jury, and sentenced to three years (18 months to serve).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the warrantless search of White’s cell phones violated the Fourth Amendment	Search was a valid probationary search supported by reasonable suspicion	Search exceeded probation search scope (phones not listed) and lacked reasonable suspicion	Search was reasonable: phones fell within residence search condition and officers had reasonable suspicion
Whether officers needed a warrant before searching phones found in the residence	Warrant unnecessary because probation condition authorized searches and reasonable suspicion existed	Warrant required because devices are distinct privacy interests beyond "person, vehicle, residence"	No warrant required under these facts; probation condition and reasonable suspicion justified search
Whether evidence seized should be suppressed because the warrant was based on illegally obtained evidence	Evidence admissible because initial search and phone search were lawful probation searches	Evidence tainted by unlawful phone search, so warrant and subsequent analysis invalid	Denial of suppression affirmed; search lawful and evidence admissible
Sufficiency of the evidence for conviction under the child-pornography statute	Images and expert/agent testimony established sexual conduct by minors and White’s possession	Images did not show "lewd" exhibition or prove subjects were minors beyond reasonable doubt	Evidence sufficient; jury could reasonably find images were lewd and subjects were minors

United States v. Knights, 534 U.S. 112 (probation condition + reasonable suspicion can justify warrantless search)
Samson v. California, 547 U.S. 843 (suspicionless searches of parolees under totality analysis held permissible)
State v. Ballard, 874 N.W.2d 61 (N.D. 2016) (suspicionless search of an unsupervised probationer was unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment)
State v. Gonzalez, 862 N.W.2d 535 (N.D. 2015) (cell phones located in residence are within scope of a valid probationary search of the residence)
State v. Adams, 788 N.W.2d 619 (N.D. 2010) (search of containers within probationer’s residence falls within probation search scope)