This case raises an interesting issue of first impression in this Circuit that may impact electronic discovery in future criminal investigations and cases: How long may the government retain seized and imaged electronic evidence before conducting a review of that evidence to determine whether any of it falls outside the scope of a search warrant? The answer to this question requires a careful case-by-case factual analysis because what may be appropriate under one set of facts and circumstances may not be so under another. For the reasons discussed below, the Court finds that the government’s more than fifteen-month delay in reviewing the seized electronic evidence, under the facts and circumstances of this case, constitutes an unreasonable seizure under the Fourth Amendment. - Page 11 Doc 219
05/17/2012 219 ORDER DENYING 128 Motion to Dismiss as to Michael Metter (1); AND GRANTING 129 Motion to Suppress as to Michael Metter (1) - For the reasons set forth in the Attached Written Memorandum and Order, Defendant Metter's motion to dismiss on the basis of improper venue is DENIED, without prejudice to renew at the conclusion of the government's case at trial. Defendant Metter's motion to suppress the electronic evidence seized and imaged pursuant to the Metter Home Search Warrant, Office Search Warrant, and Email Search Warrant is GRANTED. SO ORDERED by Judge Dora Lizette Irizarry on 5/17/2012. (Irizarry, Dora) (Entered: 05/17/2012)
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
