United States v. Keith
980 F. Supp. 2d 33
D. Mass.2013Background
- Keith is charged with distribution and possession of child pornography; moves to suppress evidence from a residence search.
- Warrant relied on two information sources: (1) NCMEC CyberTipline from December 2009; (2) Staples laptop investigation from July 2010.
- Staples work order listed Keith’s name and Haverhill, MA address; Keith admitted ownership and downloading of child-pornography files.
- New Hampshire police shared Staples laptop findings with Massachusetts authorities; warrant executed September 17, 2010; Miranda warnings given and admissions obtained.
- Court analyzes Fourth Amendment applicability to CyberTipline and private searches, and whether suppression is warranted given the CyberTipline involvement.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether AOL/NCMEC CyberTipline searches are government searches. | Keith argues CyberTipline contents were government action. | Keith contends government must warrant private searches; CyberTipline taints. | AOL monitoring private; no Fourth Amendment issue; NCMEC contents inspection violated Fourth Amendment. |
| Whether NCMEC acted as a government agent under Silva. | Keith claims NCMEC’s role makes it a government actor. | Keith argues NCMEC’s searches are government-led. | NCMEC’s CyberTipline satisfies Silva factors; acts as agent of government. |
| Whether CyberTipline information tainted probable cause for the warrant. | Keith contends tainted info undermines probable cause. | Keith asserts reliance on CyberTipline taints the affidavit. | Probable cause supported by Staples laptop investigation even if CyberTipline is excised. |
| Whether the exclusionary rule should suppress the fruits of the search. | Keith requests suppression due to Fourth Amendment violation by NCMEC. | Keith seeks exclusion to deter future Fourth Amendment violations. | Leon/Krull doctrine; reliance was objectively reasonable; suppression denied. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Silva, 554 F.3d 13 (1st Cir. 2009) (private party vs government actor analysis (Silva factors))
- Walter v. United States, 447 U.S. 649 (U.S. 1980) (private search expansion requires a warrant to view contents)
- United States v. Jacobsen, 466 U.S. 109 (U.S. 1984) (private search, then government search; distinction from this case)
- United States v. Krull, 480 U.S. 340 (U.S. 1987) (private reliance on statutory scheme; deterrence considerations)
- United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (U.S. 1984) (good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule)