United States of America v. Jason William Cathcart

18-30163Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit05.09.2019

Gesamter Gesetzestext

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
JASON WILLIAM CATHCART,
Defendant-Appellee.
No. 18-30163
D.C. No.
1:16-cr-02044-SAB-1
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Washington
Stanley Allen Bastian, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted August 26, 2019
Seattle, Washington
Before: HAWKINS, McKEOWN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
The United States appeals the district court’s grant of Jason Cathcart’s
motion to suppress evidence of child pornography found pursuant to a search
warrant. The district court concluded the warrant was not supported by probable
cause and the good faith exception did not apply. Because the parties are familiar
with the facts, we will not recite them here. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
FILED
SEP 5 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2
§ 1291, and we reverse.
We need not reach the question of probable cause in this case. Even if the
warrant lacked probable cause, the good faith exception to the Fourth
Amendment’s exclusionary rule applies. United States v. Elmore, 917 F.3d 1068,
1076 (9th Cir. 2019) (holding that the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule
is especially likely to be applicable “when an officer acting with objective good
faith has obtained a search warrant from a judge or magistrate and acted within its
scope” (quoting United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 920 (1984))). The affidavit
supporting the warrant at issue here contained more evidence than the bare
inference present in United States v. Needham, 718 F.3d 1190, 1194-95 (9th Cir.
2013). Because a reasonable law enforcement officer acting in good faith could
conclude there was probable cause to search Cathcart’s devices, we reverse the
district court’s order granting Cathcart’s motion to suppress.
REVERSED.

-- 2 of 2 --

Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort

Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.