this case presents a vague an overbroad condition of supervised release and unlike many of the cases that i've been here talking about supervised release this issue has been preserved and argued quite well for a while mr shannon filed a modification a motion to modify his conditions of supervisory soon after this court decided thompson before the district could have a hearing on that the probation officer filed a violation of report based on a closed circuit television camera sound in his apartment and some c d s that she didn't know where there that revocation was not entered the district court said that he was getting the line but decided not to revoke and then it went on to modify special condition number two and that's why we're here today is special condition number two the wording that the district court chose is vague and overbroad and could potentially apply to thousands and thousands of items that mr shannon might want or need to have in his possession or use in the community the language is any device is associated or falling within the general category of information technology as pointed out in both our bruce and in the could include a computer mouse a calculator it actually would include a landline telephone and what the real problem in this case the district courts concerned was mr shannon potential downloading storing and viewing of child pornography and with that being the main concern of the district court there is a much more narrowly tailored way to address that concern than essentially a blanket prohibition on information technology somebody suggested there should be some list of things where you landlines and a t m cards and things like that that should not be included well i think have to obtain permission for any device that has the capability reviewing storing downloading time child pornography and the district court i think this is understood that and thought that we were talking about devices that only show or download child pornography and i and that certainly was not the argument defense counsel made on our appendix page seven i'm sorry page four that the defense attorney actually says capable of doing that is it's not something that only because for example some drive is capable of storing child pornography games pictures brief know maybe i'll be limited to finance you know what he can actually use that's why i'm wondering if there's a list of things that you're worried about that he can use but apparently too many things have m day i think that's part of the problem with enforcing this condition is that it's a constantly changing situation and i think that we're in the balonne case or bollen case that was relied on by defense counsel they say that the language used in that case which refers mostly to computers and associated devices is necessarily meant to apply to items that have the capability of downloading or storing child pornography the district court said that that was not broad enough to cover the situation so mr shannon understands that he cannot download possess store child pornography and the condition that he suggested he would know which devices to report to probation if he were to purchase them the condition as it is now is much broader than that and would include getting a new driver's license when the smart d s come out getting a new credit card with a chip reader which most of us have started to receive now getting a new remote control the ones that you can talk into to change the t v channel those sorts of things would be covered by the condition is now but would not be can covered by a condition the condition that he proposed in every device have a blockage in it is something that prevents i don't know i'm not ticks merde so i don't know what the parents and other people who might be concerned about your skin blocking make it unable to exit things and i don't know if that's even possible anymore i know that it's possible for computers i think it's possible for there are crackpots that you can program to start a certain time those all use the internet you can control from your phone but i don't think they have the apps to prevent downloading of information because that's not the way they're used to there's nothing you put on there for you that uses child pornography for the duration you know i would think that i always say you know if we can do all these things we should be able to actually stop child pornography on the internet right there you know anything that is unknown files should be able to be deleted i don't know if that's a possibility i just don't know enough about the technology but i do know is is that monitoring technology is possible for things that are computers and associated devices objectionable if the condition applied only to those kind of devices that were capable of storing pornography or child pornography so it but as it's written which is on page sixteen of our prediction to students questions i'll say the remainder defendant who does not understand with the can of what his condition of supervised release is this is a case about a defendant who doesn't agree with it and that's an important distinction because the claim on appeal is that this is vague an overbr and this court's defined those terms that is doesn't inhibit a wide range of activity and one that does not afford a person a reasonable intelligence sufficient notice of conduct prohibitive as the courts already recognize mr shannon is sort of beyond reasonable intelligence he thinks he's pretty smart and by this record i think yes and certainly he's tech savvy but this is a notice requirement it's not a prohibition unlike v that the defense cite says as the case to look at that he's prohibited voelker from amusing internet at all or having any computers at all here this is a notice requirement mr shannon has to notify his probation officer when he wants to get certain things and the other part is the condition as a whole when you look at the hearings in this case and the condition as a whole shows that the defendant really does understand what's going on here and just to back up the question before this court is really very simple and narrow because the defendant conceded that a condition like this is appropriate and necessary in fact sort of at the end of a really lengthy here and his attorney said look any device that could be used to do unlawful things a understanding why she picked that language is understanding mr shannon himself and what she's dealt with and what the probation office has dealt with in terms of mature shannen and one can look at the the hearing in this case prior to the review of the conditions when mr shannon was testified he had scrubbing software on his computer and his defense attorney asked him well can't you use that to completely erase everything off the computer he said well yeah but that's certainly not my intent ok so then i asked him mr shannon isn't it true that if you had child pornography on this computer and you use this scrubbing software it would be gone so that if your probation officer came to see your computer she won't be able to find it well that's apples and oranges i wouldn't say that i mean that's not what i'm trying to do we go a little bit further in the hearing and we're talking about the encryption that he had on his computer that led to this final petition he encrypted a very large image he told the probation officer that was a picture of his truck at the hearing he said it could be a truck or could have been miley cyrus i don't know i'm not sure which one it is so this is what we're dealing with he's he's trying to manipulate the conditions so judge crabbe knowing shannon very well devised a condition that was a little bit broader than what he was suggesting because what she specifically wanted to include were these external devices the defense talks about the camera and the peephole at his apartment and makes much of the fact that it was returned to him because it wasn't a violation of his condition the point is none of this stuff is a violation if they do if the probation office knows he has it and can look at it they don't know what to look at if they don't know what he has so when you look at the whole record what we have to do is what's reasonable and practical in a given case this condition is tailored to mr shannon and his tailor to the kind of supervisee that he is how long was this suspended sentence how is it supervised release life right i'm going to be here a while longer anything now there's a couple of other things i would  address the defense suggest that you can't look at such special conditions too as a whole when you try to determine what devices it covers and i disagree with that because as you read through the condition it indicates that as to these devices  probation office is authorized to install any application necessary to monitor it that the defendant shall consent to a cooperate with an in depth unannounced examinations of the tech equipment that the probation office can actually take it and look at it and i talking about an they're going to take as microwave we've got to be practical when we're dealing with these things probation officers aren't robots and neither is mr shannon these people have to be able to work together to manage these conditions judge crabb later in the hearing and finally stated to mr shannon the plane is that any device that falls within the category of special condition too may be removed if the probation officer believes it's necessary to examine it further and mr shannon said i completely agree with that accordingly this is reasonable in light of the whole record the these are people trying to work together and not in this case judge crabbe didn't revoke mr shannon's supervised release for having the scrubbing software for having the encrypted file for having the c and d v d s that had very young girls on them she said look you're playing games here stop it and let's just try to work together i think that's the best we can do otherwise we're going to be back here time and again because technology is honor is that in the reply brief the defense suggests that the government has misstated the record i will tell you that there is nothing that isn't a status hearing where rosemary what he the time he faces if he continues to do things of course time right and then he could be put back in secret he's released with these kinds of offenses because you have a lifetime period of supervised release you can always go back and be put on supervised release now at some point if mr shannon toes the line and looks like he gets it he could come back and ask to have his supervisor least you know modified terminated people do that all the time but as long as he continues to push the envelope and play games that's not going to happen know many times as you see him back before judge grab for revocation two times for advocation he was revoked once modification several times mostly to help him with housing and employment and dns and the question you asked  the government yes he is aware of what he's doing this is the second time i've represented mr freeh and i don't have quite the history that she does or the judge crabb does but i do know mr shannon quite well i will say that you know the language is very different and we are talking about language and and the language proposed does limit the types of devices whereas the language imposed is very very broad and mr shannon is bright and that and very technology savvy not too bright he's bright when it comes to computers oh and he he knows if it's limited to him but when he sees the fried language here he's not entirely sure what he needs to understand probation officer about mistresses and you know my admiration for your advocacy but do you really think we have an individual who's worried about buying a new microwave i think not so much a microwave i think he is worried about probably other peripheral things for his computer such as the moment so let's let's take that the concern so what would be matter of giving notice is that really what what what this is all about of him that he because he's so text me and the concern of the district court judge that i mean  you know we could come up with a parade of horribles as i want to suggest that's what you've done but but you know examples which i think really really are a little beyond the pale i think it really depends on the case i think mr shannon knows that they're concerned about downloading child pornography rightly his behavior has showed that he interprets that very strictly and i think part of the problem is not  much the understanding between judge crabbe and mr she didn't it's that probation has been not quite consistent with enforcement as for example describing software had been on there for four years and that only the last probation officer complained about it and about the monitoring software being scrubbed arms are of child pornography being described the way the monitoring software works is that once he goes to a web site it logs that information not on his computer but on a separate server informs the probation office so even if you scrubs everything from his computer even if you burns the computer in acid the probation office still knows he's visited those websites so that inconsistent foresman of