121 F.4th 727
9th Cir.2024Background
- The FBI investigated Aaron Holmes for child pornography based on two Cybertips forwarded by NCMEC, originating from Kik and Facebook.
- Facebook provided a tip to NCMEC including two images, one matching a known child exploitation hash value; these were sent to Agent Steele, who viewed them without a warrant.
- The information collected led to a search warrant for Holmes’s residence, during which child pornography was found on his cellphone and he made incriminating statements.
- Holmes moved to suppress all evidence flowing from Agent Steele's warrantless viewing of the Facebook images, citing a violation of the Fourth Amendment.
- The government admitted the warrantless search but argued the evidence was admissible under the good-faith exception and inevitable discovery doctrine.
- The district court denied the suppression motion; Holmes appealed after pleading guilty to one count and reserving his right to appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Warrantless Viewing of Images | Warrants are required; agent's viewing violated 4th Amendment | Good-faith reliance on precedent; inevitable discovery exceptions | No good faith or inevitability; warrantless search violated 4th Am |
| Good-Faith Exception | No binding appellate precedent specifically authorized search | Conduct was plausibly within private-search doctrine precedent | Not specifically authorized; good-faith exception not applicable |
| Inevitable Discovery | Parallel Kik investigation would not have led to same evidence | Routine investigation would have uncovered same evidence eventually | Government failed to prove inevitability by historical facts |
| Scope of Private Search Doctrine | Law enforcement exceeded scope of private search | Viewing hash-matched images only confirmed prior private search | Viewing exceeded private-search scope given facts of this case |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Jacobsen, 466 U.S. 109 (private search doctrine allows government search only to scope of prior private search)
- United States v. Walter, 447 U.S. 649 (warrantless government viewing exceeded scope of prior private actor’s access)
- United States v. Wilson, 13 F.4th 961 (warrantless viewing of images flagged by hash value can exceed private search under certain circumstances)
- Davis v. United States, 564 U.S. 229 (good-faith exception if officers rely on binding appellate precedent later overruled)
- Nix v. Williams, 467 U.S. 431 (inevitable discovery doctrine requires showing lawful discovery would have occurred)
- United States v. Cano, 934 F.3d 1002 (good-faith exception applies only if binding precedent specifically authorizes conduct)