United States v. Daniel Brown, 701 F.3d 120

Brown was convicted in the Western District of Virginia on counts for receipt and possession of child pornography after a laptop search yielded videos and images.
Investigators traced downloaded files to Medical Transport, LLC, leading to a search warrant for the building and seizure of Brown’s laptop when he retrieved it from an ambulance.
Brown argued the Medical Transport warrant did not authorize seizing his laptop because the device was not found in the building; the district court rejected suppression on merits.
A second search warrant was obtained and executed on the laptop, revealing the child pornography material.
At trial Brown moved to dismiss Count Two as a lesser-included offense of Count One; the district court dismissed Count Two and sentenced only on Count One, 144 months plus supervised release.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the suppression motion was properly denied on the merits	Brown contends the seizure was unlawful and merits suppression.	Government asserts exigent circumstances justified seizure and warrant compliance.	Exigent circumstances supported warrantless seizure; suppression denied on merits.
Whether the laptop seizure outside the building violated the warrant scope	Warrant covered the Medical Transport building, not Brown or ambulance outside.	Exigent circumstances justified seizure to prevent destruction of evidence.	Seizure reasonable under exigent circumstances and Fourth Amendment waiver.
Whether Count Two was properly dismissed in favor of Count One	Counts are not mutually exclusive given independent conduct.	Possession is a lesser-included offense of receipt; dismissal of Count Two appropriate.	Court properly vacated Count Two and sentenced on Count One.
Whether the jury instructions on knowing possession vs knowing receipt were plain error	Inadequate instruction could undermine verdict on knowledge of content.	No objection at trial; any error would be non-plain or not preserved.	Instructions were not plainly erroneous; no reversible error.

United States v. Place, 462 U.S. 696 (1983) (probable-cause seizure exception to warrant requirement)
Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967) (exigencies and reasonableness framework for searches)
Ball v. United States, 470 U.S. 856 (1985) (mult.is-offense convictions; vacate lesser offense when greater offense exists)
United States v. Mitchell, 565 F.3d 1347 (11th Cir. 2009) (warrantless seizure to prevent tampering validated by exigent-circumstances)
United States v. Clutter, 674 F.3d 980 (8th Cir. 2012) (upholds warrantless seizure of computer to prevent destruction of evidence)
United States v. Respress, 9 F.3d 483 (6th Cir. 1993) (seizure of a suitcase to prevent disappearance of evidence)