United States v. Joseph Pirosko
787 F.3d 358
| 6th Cir. | 2015Background
- Pirosko’s 2012 hotel-room search yielded laptop and USB drive containing child pornography.
- Indictment charged receipt and distribution under 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(2) and possession under § 2252A(a)(5)(B).
- Pirosko moved to compel discovery of government “law enforcement tools” used to identify his GUID on LimeZilla; district court denied.
- Pirosko moved to suppress, arguing the warrant relied on unreliable information; district court denied.
- Pirosko pleaded guilty to count one with a plea waiver of most appellate rights; sentencing range was 262–327 months; district court sentenced to 240 months (statutory maximum).
- On appeal, Pirosko challenges the discovery denial, suppression ruling, the new claim of warrantless tracking, and the sentence’s reasonableness.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court abused its discretion in denying discovery | Pirosko argued government tools and records were discoverable | Government privilege and lack of demonstrated need justified withholding | No reversible abuse; discovery denial affirmed |
| Whether the discovery request was material to the defense | Discovery would aid defense and potentially disputing distribution | Materiality not established; Rule 16 scope limited to defense preparation | Discovery immaterial to guilt/distribution; affirmed denial |
| Whether the warrantless tracking claim is appealable/merits relief | Government used unconstitutional warrantless tracking to obtain warrant | Appeal waiver and lack of compelling evidence justify rejecting claim | Waiver valid; merits inadequately supported; no Franks-style relief |
| Whether the sentence is procedurally or substantively unreasonable | Sentence excessive given Guidelines range and factors | Court properly applied guidelines and 3553(a) factors; within range and statutory max | Sentence affirmed as reasonable within the framework; no reversible error |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Budziak, 697 F.3d 1105 (9th Cir. 2012) (discovery tools and potential error for denying discovery weighed against defendant)
- United States v. Chiaradio, 684 F.3d 265 (1st Cir. 2012) (material for comparison in discovery of software; limited relevance to this case)
- United States v. Conner, 521 F. App’x 493 (6th Cir. 2013) (discusses distribution enhancement via file-sharing knowledge)
- United States v. Keefer, 490 F. App’x 797 (6th Cir. 2012) (upheld five-level USB/unallocated-space image enhancement where evidence supported knowledge of images)
- United States v. Boxley, 373 F.3d 759 (6th Cir. 2004) (general principle on evidentiary techniques and admissibility)
- Jones v. United States, 132 S. Ct. 945 (U.S. 2012) (GPS tracking discussion and limits of surveillance precedent)
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007) (procedural/substantive reasonableness of sentences; guidelines considerations)