Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States of America v. Steven L. Carson

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS SPRINGFIELD DIVISION


November 19, 2012

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
STEVEN L. CARSON, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Richard Mills, U.S. District Judge:

E-FILED

Monday, 19 November, 2012 04:47:54 PM Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT & RECOMMENDATION

This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation [d/e 17] regarding suppression of physical evidence entered by U.S. Magistrate Judge Byron G. Cudmore, and Defendant Steven L. Carson's Motion to Supress Evidence Obtained in Violation of the Fourth Amendment [d/e 11].

In the Report and Recommendation [d/e 17], Judge Cudmore recommends denying the Motion to Suppress [d/e 11].

The Court notes that no evidentiary hearing was held regarding these issues.

[notdef]

Neither party has filed a timely objection to the Report and Recommendation.

The Court has reviewed the case file and concludes that the evidence was lawfully obtained.

The seizure of the books was clearly authorized by the plain language of the search warrant and the search warrant application. See Exhibit [d/e 11-2], pp. 9, 22, 23.

The seizure of the Canon SX-120 camera was authorized because

(1) it was a camera that could record videos, and (2) the search warrant authorized the seizure of "video recording devices, video recording players, and video display monitors." Id. at p. 23.

The Court finds that the seizure of the remaining photographic equipment and data storage devices were authorized by the search warrant, as set forth by Judge Cudmore. See Report and Recommendation [d/e 17], pp. 7-8.

Finally, the Court adopts Judge Cudmore's conclusion that the seizure of the bondage materials was lawful under the plain view doctrine. See id. at pp. 8-11.

Ergo , the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation [d/e

17] entered by Judge Cudmore and DENIES the Defendant's Motion to Suppress [d/e 11].

IT IS SO ORDERED.

FOR THE COURT:

Richard Mills United States District Judge

20121119

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.