25 F.4th 494
7th Cir.2022Background
- FBI investigated Charles Skaggs after tips and online/social-media indicia (prior 1997 conviction for sexual misconduct with a minor; suggestive Facebook photos; involvement with overseas orphanages and a group named "Ukrainian Angels") and a report he planned to meet 14‑year‑old girls in Ukraine.
- On December 10, 2016, CBP/HSI referred Skaggs to secondary inspection at Minneapolis–St. Paul airport; agents found four thumb drives in his backpack (hidden in underwear) despite his denying having electronic media.
- An HSI agent "previewed" the thumb drives at the airport and found suspected child‑sexual images; subsequent forensic analysis at an HSI lab produced videos and screenshots, including videos of Skaggs’s fourteen‑year‑old daughter being filmed nude in the bathroom.
- FBI obtained a warrant to image the drives and found organized child pornography files; agents later executed a warrant at Skaggs’s home, where he admitted secretly filming his daughter and possessing child pornography.
- Skaggs attempted to hide a backup hard drive by instructing his son to check a concealed spot; law enforcement recovered the hard drive and found backup copies of the illicit videos and incriminating internet searches.
- Skaggs was charged on 12 counts (sexual exploitation, possession, concealment); he moved to suppress the border‑search evidence and certain un‑Mirandized statements; the district court denied suppression of the digital evidence, convicted him after a bench trial, and imposed a life sentence (believing 18 U.S.C. § 3559(e) mandatory), which the Seventh Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the warrantless border search/preview of thumb drives violated the Fourth Amendment (post‑Riley/Carpenter) | Government: Wanjiku controls; reasonable suspicion suffices for non‑routine border searches of electronic media and agents acted in good faith. | Skaggs: Riley and Carpenter require heightened protection (warrant/probable cause) for electronic devices even at the border. | Affirms denial of suppression: reasonable suspicion supported the search; officers had objectively reasonable good‑faith belief; Wanjiku governs. |
| Whether § 3559(e) required mandatory life because of Skaggs’s prior state sex conviction and whether facts needed jury determination | Government: District court erred in citing the wrong federal statute but the error was harmless because the court would have imposed life in its discretion. | Skaggs: Prior Indiana conviction does not qualify under § 3559(e); enhancement facts should have been found by a jury. | Error in statutory matching acknowledged but harmless: appellate court affirms life sentence because district court stated it would impose life in any event and explained § 3553(a) factors. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Wanjiku, 919 F.3d 472 (7th Cir. 2019) (controls; held reasonable suspicion was sufficient for border searches of electronic devices and officers acted in objective good faith)
- Riley v. California, 573 U.S. 373 (2014) (Supreme Court decision recognizing heightened privacy interests in cell phones outside the border context)
- Carpenter v. United States, 138 S. Ct. 2206 (2018) (Supreme Court decision expanding privacy protections for certain digital data; did not address border searches)
- United States v. Cotterman, 709 F.3d 952 (9th Cir. 2013) (found reasonable suspicion justified a forensic border search of electronic devices)
- United States v. Anderson, 517 F.3d 953 (7th Cir. 2008) (harmless‑error standard for sentencing determinations)
- United States v. Lovies, 16 F.4th 493 (7th Cir. 2021) (remand unnecessary where district court makes clear it would impose the same sentence in its discretion)