United States v. Lamica, 689 F. App'x 91

Defendant Joseph A. Lamica pleaded guilty to receiving child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2252A(a)(2)(A) and 2252A(b)(1).
District Court sentenced Lamica to 168 months’ imprisonment and 40 years’ supervised release.
As a condition of supervised release, the court ordered Lamica to submit to warrantless searches of his person or property "at any time with or without a warrant by any law enforcement or probation officer with reasonable suspicion involving a violation of a condition of supervised release or unlawful conduct."
Lamica appealed, arguing the search condition improperly authorized warrantless searches based on reasonable suspicion of "unlawful conduct" (a broader term) rather than only "criminal conduct."
The government defended the condition as a standard, authorized condition for sex-offense convictions and reasonably related to the offense and Lamica’s risk.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the supervised-release search condition unlawfully authorized warrantless searches based on reasonable suspicion of "unlawful conduct" rather than criminal conduct	Government: condition is standard for sex-offense cases and authorized by statute; reasonably related to offense and risk	Lamica: condition improperly permits searches on mere "unlawful conduct," a broader standard than criminal conduct, infringing liberty	Affirmed: court did not abuse discretion; condition is standard for sex offenses and reasonably related to offense and defendant's history

United States v. Brown, 402 F.3d 133 (2d Cir. 2005) (standards for reviewing supervised-release conditions)
United States v. Parisi, 821 F.3d 343 (2d Cir. 2016) (upholding similar search condition)
United States v. Rodriguez-Gonzalez, 899 F.2d 177 (2d Cir. 1990) (preservation rule for appellate review)