AO 106 (REV 4/10) Affidavit for Search Warrant AUSA Christine M. O'Neill, (312) 371-0762

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, EASTERN DIVISION

In the Matter of the Search of:

Subject Phone 3, further described in Attachment A 

Case Number: 

APPLICATION AND AFFIDAVIT FOR A SEARCH WARRANT

I, Alison M. Teevan, a Task Force Officer of the Drug Enforcement Administration, request a search warrant 

and state under penalty of perjury that I have reason to believe that on the following property or premises:

See Attachment A

located in the Northern District of Illinois, there is now concealed:

See Attachment B 

The basis for the search under Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(c) is evidence and instrumentalities.

The search is related to a violation of:

Code Section

Title 21, United States Code, Sections 841 and 846

Offense Description

narcotics

The application is based on these facts:

See Attached Affidavit,

Continued on the attached sheet.

Applicant’s Signature

ALISON M. TEEVAN, Task Force Officer

Drug Enforcement Administration

Printed name and title

Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 4.1, this warrant is presented by reliable electronic means. The above-named agent 

provided a sworn statement attesting to the truth of the foregoing affidavit by telephone.

Date: June 8, 2020

Judge’s signature

City and State: Chicago, Illinois M. DAVID WEISMAN, U.S. Magistrate Judge

Printed name and title

FILED

6/8/2020

THOMAS G. BRUTON CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT

20M286

Case: 1:20-mc-00286 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 1 of 25 PageID #:1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT )

)

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS )

AFFIDAVIT

I, Alison M. Teevan, being duly sworn, state as follows: 

1. I am a Task Force Officer with the Drug Enforcement Administration. I 

have been so employed since approximately November 2017. I am currently assigned 

to the DEA Chicago Field Division, and my responsibilities include the investigation 

of narcotics trafficking.

2. As part of my duties as a DEA Task Force Officer, I investigate criminal 

violations relating to narcotics trafficking offenses, including criminal violations of 

the Federal Controlled Substance laws, including, but not limited to Title 18, United 

States Code, Sections 1956, and 1957, and Title 21, United States Code, Sections 841, 

843, 846, 848, 952 and 963. I have been involved with various electronic surveillance 

methods, the debriefing of defendants, informants, and witnesses, as well as others 

who have knowledge of the distribution, transportation, storage and importation of 

controlled substances. 

3. I have received training in the area of narcotics investigations, money 

laundering, financial investigations and various methods which drug dealers use in 

an effort to conceal and launder the proceeds of their illicit drug trafficking 

enterprises. I have participated in numerous investigations involving violations of 

narcotics laws. 

Case: 1:20-mc-00286 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 2 of 25 PageID #:2
2

4. I have participated in investigations that have led to the issuance of 

search warrants involving violations of narcotic laws. These warrants involved the 

search of locations including: residences of targets, their associates and relatives, 

“stash houses” (houses used as drug/money storage locations), storage facilities, bank 

safe deposit boxes, cellular/camera phones, and computers. Evidence searched for and 

recovered in these locations has included controlled substances, records pertaining to 

the expenditures and profits realized there from, monetary instruments and various 

assets that were purchased with the proceeds of drug trafficking. I have participated 

in the execution of multiple federal search warrants. 

5. This affidavit is made in support of an application for a warrant to 

search a black LG Stylo 4 cellular telephone, bearing an unknown serial number 

(“Subject Phone 1”), a black Samsung cellular telephone, bearing IMEI number 

352695107183874 (“Subject Phone 2”) and a black Sonim XP8800 cellular 

telephone, bearing IMEI number 356512090110556 (“Subject Phone 3”)

(collectively, the “Subject Phones”) for evidence and instrumentalities described 

further in Attachment B, concerning narcotics offenses, in violation of Title 21, United 

States Code, Sections 841 and 846. 

6. The statements in this affidavit are based on my personal knowledge, 

and on information I have received from other law enforcement personnel and from 

persons with knowledge regarding relevant facts. Because this affidavit is being 

submitted for the limited purpose of securing a search warrant, I have not included 

Case: 1:20-mc-00286 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 3 of 25 PageID #:3
3

each and every fact known to me concerning this investigation. I have set forth facts 

that I believe are sufficient to establish probable cause to believe that evidence and 

instrumentalities of violations of Title 21, United States Code, Section 846, are 

located within the Subject Phones.

I. FACTS SUPPORTING PROBABLE CAUSE TO SEARCH THE

SUBJECT PHONES 

7. As explained below, on May 15, 2020, during the arrest of Arnulfo 

GARAY GARAY (GARAY), law enforcement recovered three cellular telephones –

namely, a black LG Stylo 4 cellular telephone, bearing an unknown serial number 

(“Subject Phone 1”), a black Samsung cellular telephone, bearing IMEI number 

352695107183874 (“Subject Phone 2”) and a black Sonim XP8800 cellular 

telephone, bearing IMEI number 356512090110556 (“Subject Phone 3”)

(collectively, the “Subject Phones”)

8. Because the Subject Phones were found in GARAY’s possession on 

May 15, 2020, shortly after his last known use of a telephone in furtherance of a

narcotics offense, because there were multiple phone communications between 

GARAY and a Confidential Source, and because in my experience individuals 

engaged in narcotics trafficking often use telephones to contact coconspirators, there 

is probable cause to believe the Subject Phones, described further in Attachment A, 

contain evidence of violations of narcotics offenses.

Case: 1:20-mc-00286 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 4 of 25 PageID #:4
4

A. GARAY’s Narcotics Transaction 

9. Since May 2020, a DEA Confidential Source (CS)1, at the direction of 

law enforcement, has been in negotiations with a Mexico-based narcotics trafficker 

(UM1) regarding the transportation of fentanyl to Chicago, Illinois. In early May 

2020, UM1 informed the CS2 that UM1 was orchestrating the transportation of 

multiple kilograms of fentanyl to the Chicago, Illinois area at a date to be determined. 

10. On or about May 13, 2020, at approximately 1:25 p.m., UM1, using a 

Mexican telephone number ending in 9237, stated that UM1’s associate was in 

possession of multiple kilograms of fentanyl.3 UM1 and the CS then negotiated the 

 

1 The CS has one prior arrest in 1998 for possession of a controlled substance and has worked 

as a source with DEA at various times since then. He was activated as a DEA source most 

recently on April 17, 2020. The CS is currently providing intelligence to and working with 

the DEA for the purposes of monetary gain. Since being reactivated he has been paid 

approximately $15,000. 

2 Unless otherwise noted, all phone conversations between the CS and UM1 are audio 

recorded. All times are approximate. 

3 Some of the consensually recorded conversations (hereinafter “recorded conversations”) 

have been summarized in this Affidavit. The language that is quoted from the recorded 

conversations throughout this Affidavit is based upon a preliminary review of the recorded 

conversations, and not on final transcripts of the recorded conversations. The times listed 

for the recorded conversations are approximate. The summaries do not include all 

statements or topics covered during the course of the recorded conversations. At various 

points in the Affidavit I have included in brackets my interpretation of words and phrases 

used in the recorded conversations. My interpretations are based on information received 

from the CS, the contents and context of the recorded conversations, events occurring before 

and after the conversations, my knowledge of the investigation as a whole, my experience 

and training, and the experience and training of other law enforcement agents in this 

investigation. Some of the recorded conversations contained herein are in the Spanish 

language. For these conversations, I have relied on draft – not final – English translations 

of conversations in Spanish done by DEA agents and/or interpreters contracted by DEA.

Case: 1:20-mc-00286 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 5 of 25 PageID #:5
5

future purchase of five kilograms of fentanyl, and that UM1 would have his associate 

deliver the kilograms to the CS.

11. On or about May 14, 2020, the CS and UM1 had at least 20 additional

conversations during which they discussed the price per kilogram of fentanyl and the 

location where the CS’s purchase would take place. During one of these calls, at 

approximately 11:46 a.m., the CS and UM1, using a Mexican telephone number 

ending in 6892, had a conversation during which an unknown subject asked UM1 in 

the background how many kilograms the CS needed, and UM1 responded, “cinco 

[five].” The unknown subject then repeated the amount. Based on my training and 

experience, I believe UM1 and the unknown subject in Mexico were clarifying the 

amount and dictating the delivery of five kilograms, which indicates additional 

kilograms may have been available for delivery.

12. At approximately 4:36 p.m., UM1, using a Mexican telephone number 

ending in 9237, sent a text message to the CS supplying the CS with a phone number, 

(331) 220-9221. In both a subsequent phone call and text message, UM1 stated the 

number belonged to UM1’s associate who was currently in possession of the kilograms

of fentanyl, and instructed the CS to call him later in the evening to coordinate the 

delivery. 

13. At approximately 6:24 p.m., the CS had a conversation with an 

individual later identified as Arnulfo GARAY4, using telephone number (331) 220-

 

4 GARAY was positively identified at the time of his arrest on May 15, 2020, via his own 

personal admissions as well as his possession of an Illinois State Identification Card in the 

Case: 1:20-mc-00286 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 6 of 25 PageID #:6
6

9221. During this call, the CS asked GARAY where GARAY was located so that the 

CS could stay overnight closer to GARAY in anticipation of the narcotics transaction. 

GARAY stated that he lived in the area of Aurora/Oswego, Illinois. Furthermore, 

GARAY stated that he would not be able available until after 2:00 p.m. to conduct the 

transaction due to work commitments in Indiana. The CS offered to meet GARAY in 

Indiana the following day. GARAY refused because “the girls” (coded language for the 

5 kilograms of fentanyl) were located closer to GARAY’s home in the Aurora/Oswego 

area. During subsequent communications, the CS and GARAY agreed to meet the 

following day in Oswego, Illinois to conduct the transaction for five kilograms of 

fentanyl. 

14. On or about May 15, 2020, approximately 2:00 p.m., in anticipation of 

the transaction, law enforcement searched the CS and the CS’s vehicle for contraband 

with negative results. The CS then traveled to the strip mall parking lot located at 

1150 West Ogden Avenue in Montgomery, Illinois, under constant surveillance. 

15. At approximately 2:16 p.m., the CS had a conversation with GARAY, 

who was using telephone number (331) 220-9221. The CS informed GARAY that s/he 

was waiting for GARAY in the agreed-upon location. GARAY responded that he 

would be there in approximately 45 minutes. 

 

name of Arnulfo GARAY GARAY. Law enforcement and the CS compared the voice on the 

consensually-recorded calls from telephone number (331) 220-9221 to the voice of the 

individual at the transaction on May 15, 2020, and determined the voices belong to the same 

person.

Case: 1:20-mc-00286 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 7 of 25 PageID #:7
7

16. At approximately 3:02 p.m., the CS had a conversation with GARAY, 

who was using telephone number (331) 220-9221. GARAY stated that he was close,

at which point the CS advised GARAY to meet him in the strip mall parking lot 

located at 1150 West Ogden Avenue, in Montgomery, Illinois

17. At approximately 3:20 p.m., law enforcement observed a red Dodge van 

(bearing IL temporary registration #184V621, registered to Arnulfo GARAY at 5408 

State Route 71, Oswego, Illinois) arrive in the parking lot and stop directly next to 

the CS Vehicle. Law enforcement then observed GARAY, the driver of the red Dodge 

van, have a conversation with the CS in the parking lot. During this conversation, 

the CS stood outside the CS Vehicle and spoke to GARAY through his open driver’s 

window. This conversation was not recorded. According to the CS, GARAY stated that 

he needed to see proof that the CS had the money available and ready to purchase 

the narcotics.

18. At approximately 3:30 p.m., the CS contacted an undercover officer (UC)

who subsequently drove an undercover vehicle (UCV) into the parking lot and then 

parked next to the CS Vehicle and GARAY. Law enforcement observed the CS and 

GARAY walk over to the UCV, at which point the UC showed GARAY a grey duffle 

bag containing five sham bundles of money. The UC then immediately left the area.

19. After viewing the sham money, GARAY directed the CS to follow him 

back to GARAY’s residence to retrieve the narcotics. Surveillance officers then 

followed the CS as the CS drove the CS Vehicle directly behind GARAY in the Dodge 

Case: 1:20-mc-00286 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 8 of 25 PageID #:8
8

van. From the meeting location, GARAY drove directly to the residence located at 

5408 Route 71, in Oswego, Illinois. Upon arriving at the residence, GARAY and the 

CS each parked their vehicles in the driveway. They exited the vehicles and had a 

brief conversation.

20. At approximately 3:58 p.m., law enforcement, specifically aerial 

surveillance officers, observed GARAY enter the residence through the rear door.

Approximately 5 to 10 minutes later, law enforcement observed GARAY exit the 

residence through the same door, now carrying a white bag, and approach the open 

trunk compartment of the CS Vehicle. Moments later, the CS gave a pre-determined 

arrest signal to law enforcement.

21. As a result, law enforcement approached the CS and GARAY, who were 

both standing near the open trunk of the CS Vehicle and placed GARAY under arrest.

In plain view, in the open trunk compartment of the CS Vehicle, law enforcement 

observed a white plastic garbage bag. Inside the garage bag were five brick-shaped 

objects heavily wrapped in black electrical tape. 

B. The Subject Phones

22. Once in custody, law enforcement searched GARAY and recovered the 

Subject Phones and $3,523 from his pants pocket. GARAY then was released to 

further the investigation. 

23. Since May 15, 2020, the above-described Subject Phones have been in 

the government’s custody.

Case: 1:20-mc-00286 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 9 of 25 PageID #:9
9

24. At the time of arrest, data stored on Subject Phones, including text 

and voice mail messages sent and received by GARAY during the course of the 

commission of the narcotics offenses, were not known. 

25. Based upon my training and experience, I know that cellular phones 

may contain relevant evidence of narcotics offenses, including text messages made or 

received from the Subject Phones that are located in the memory of the Subject 

Phones, which messages may provide information regarding the identities of, and 

the methods and means of operation and communication used by, the participants in 

the threat and narcotics offenses. Moreover, digital photographs located in the 

memory of the Subject Phones may contain images of the tools or participants 

involved in the narcotics offenses. Moreover, digital photographs stored in the

Subject Phones may contain images of the user of the Subject Phones, the user’s 

associates (including persons involved in or knowledgeable about the subject 

offenses), places frequented by the user of the phone leading up to and during the 

subject offenses, and locations and instrumentalities used in committing the subject 

offenses.

26. In addition, based on my training and experience, I know that 

information stored within a cellular phone may provide crucial evidence of the “who, 

what, why, when, where, and how” of the criminal conduct under investigation, thus 

enabling the United States to establish and prove each element or alternatively, to 

exclude the innocent from further suspicion. In my training and experience, the 

Case: 1:20-mc-00286 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 10 of 25 PageID #:10
10

information stored within a cell phone can indicate who has used or controlled the 

cell phone. This “user attribution” evidence is analogous to the search for “indicia of 

occupancy” while executing a search warrant at a residence. For example, contacts 

lists, instant messaging logs, and communications (and the data associated with the 

foregoing, such as date and time) may indicate who used or controlled the cell phone 

at a relevant time. Further, such stored electronic data can show how and when the 

cell phone and its related account were accessed or used. Such “timeline” information 

allows investigators to understand the chronological context of cell phone access, use, 

and events relating to the crime under investigation. This “timeline” information may 

tend to either inculpate or exculpate the cell phone account owner. 

27. Additionally, information stored within a cell phone may indicate the 

geographic location of the cell phone and user at a particular time (e.g., location 

integrated into an image or video sent via email or text message to include both 

metadata and the physical location displayed in an image or video). Stored electronic 

data may also provide relevant insight into the cell phone owner’s state of mind as it 

relates to the offense under investigation. For example, information in the cell phone 

may indicate the owner’s motive and intent to commit a crime (e.g., communications 

relating to the crime), or consciousness of guilt (e.g., deleting communications in an 

effort to conceal them from law enforcement). Unless this data is destroyed, by 

breaking the cell phone itself or by a program that deletes or over-writes the data 

Case: 1:20-mc-00286 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 11 of 25 PageID #:11
11

contained within the cell phone, such data will remain stored within the cell phone 

indefinitely. 

28. Through experience as a law enforcement officer and through the 

experience of other law enforcement officers as conveyed to me, I have learned that 

individuals involved in criminal offenses, including conspiracies to possess and 

distribute narcotics, commonly use cellular telephones as a means to communicate. 

GARAY used a telephone to negotiate a narcotics offense on May 14 and May 15, 

2020. Individuals involved in criminal offenses including conspiracies to possess and 

distribute narcotics, also often store telephone numbers and names or nicknames of 

fellow conspirators on their telephones and the telephones also reflect recent call 

history. Finally, individuals often use text messaging and digital photographs in 

furtherance of their criminal activity that are stored on cellular telephones. Because, 

as explained above, the Subject Phones are associated with the target(s) in this 

case, because there was telephonic communication between participants involved in 

the threat and narcotics offenses, and because, in my experience and in the 

experience of other agents, defendants use telephones to contact co-conspirators, 

there is probable cause to believe the Subject Phones, described further in 

Attachment A, contain evidence of violations of threat and narcotics.

Case: 1:20-mc-00286 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 12 of 25 PageID #:12
12

II. SPECIFICS REGARDING SEARCHES OF ELECTRONIC STORAGE

MEDIA

29. Based upon my training and experience, and the training and 

experience of specially trained personnel whom I have consulted, searches of evidence 

from electronic storage media commonly require agents to download or copy 

information from the electronic storage media and their components, or remove most 

or all electronic storage media items (e.g. computer hardware, computer software, 

computer-related documentation, and cellular telephones) to be processed later by a 

qualified computer expert in a laboratory or other controlled environment. This is 

almost always true because of the following: 

a. Electronic storage media can store the equivalent of thousands of 

pages of information. Especially when the user wants to conceal criminal evidence, 

he or she often stores it with deceptive file names. This requires searching authorities 

to examine all the stored data to determine whether it is included in the warrant. 

This sorting process can take days or weeks, depending on the volume of data stored, 

and it would be generally impossible to accomplish this kind of data search on site.

b. Searching electronic storage media for criminal evidence is a 

highly technical process requiring expert skill and a properly controlled environment. 

The vast array of computer hardware and software available requires even computer 

experts to specialize in some systems and applications, so it is difficult to know before 

a search which expert should analyze the system and its data. The search of an 

electronic storage media system is an exacting scientific procedure which is designed 

Case: 1:20-mc-00286 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 13 of 25 PageID #:13
13

to protect the integrity of the evidence and to recover even hidden, erased, 

compressed, password-protected, or encrypted files. Since electronic storage media 

evidence is extremely vulnerable to tampering or destruction (which may be caused 

by malicious code or normal activities of an operating system), the controlled 

environment of a laboratory is essential to its complete and accurate analysis.

30. In order to fully retrieve data from a computer system, the analyst needs 

all storage media as well as the computer. The analyst needs all the system software 

(operating systems or interfaces, and hardware drivers) and any applications 

software which may have been used to create the data (whether stored on hard disk 

drives or on external media).

31. In addition, electronic storage media such as a computer, its storage 

devices, peripherals, and Internet connection interface may be instrumentalities of 

the crime(s) and are subject to seizure as such if they contain contraband or were 

used to carry out criminal activity.

III. PROCEDURES TO BE FOLLOWED IN SEARCHING ELECTRONIC

STORAGE MEDIA

32. Pursuant to Rule 41(e)(2)(B) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, 

this warrant will authorize the removal of electronic storage media and copying of 

electronically stored information found in the Subject Phones described in 

Attachment A so that they may be reviewed in a secure environment for information 

consistent with the warrant. That review shall be conducted pursuant to the following 

protocol. 

Case: 1:20-mc-00286 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 14 of 25 PageID #:14
14

33. The review of electronically stored information and electronic storage 

media removed from the Subject Phones described in Attachment A may include 

the following techniques (the following is a non-exclusive list, and the government 

may use other procedures that, like those listed below, minimize the review of 

information not within the list of items to be seized as set forth herein):

a. examination of all the data contained in such computer hardware, 

computer software, and/or memory storage devices to determine whether that data 

falls within the items to be seized as set forth in Attachment B;

b. searching for and attempting to recover any deleted, hidden, or 

encrypted data to determine whether that data falls within the list of items to be 

seized as set forth in Attachment B (any data that is encrypted and unreadable will 

not be returned unless law enforcement personnel have determined that the data is 

not (1) an instrumentality of the offenses, (2) a fruit of the criminal activity, (3) 

contraband, (4) otherwise unlawfully possessed, or (5) evidence of the offenses 

specified above);

c. surveying file directories and the individual files they contain to 

determine whether they include data falling within the list of items to be seized as 

set forth in Attachment B;

d. opening or reading portions of files, and performing key word 

searches of files, in order to determine whether their contents fall within the items to 

be seized as set forth in Attachment B. 

Case: 1:20-mc-00286 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 15 of 25 PageID #:15
15

34. The government will return any electronic storage media removed from

the Subject Phones described in Attachment A within 30 days of the removal 

unless, pursuant to Rule 41(c)(2) or (3) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, 

the removed electronic storage media contains contraband or constitutes an 

instrumentality of crime, or unless otherwise ordered by the Court.

Case: 1:20-mc-00286 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 16 of 25 PageID #:16
16

IV. CONCLUSION

35. Based on the above information, I respectfully submit that there is 

probable cause to believe that threat and narcotics offenses, in violation of Title 21, 

United States Code, Sections 841 and 846, have been committed, and that evidence 

and instrumentalities relating to this criminal conduct, as further described in 

Attachment B, will be found in the Subject Phones, as further described in 

Attachment A. I therefore respectfully request that this Court issue a search warrant 

for the Subject Phones more particularly described in Attachment A, authorizing 

the seizure of the items described in Attachment B, pursuant to the protocol described 

in the addendum to Attachment B. 

FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NOT. 

____________________________

Alison Teevan

Task Force Officer

Drug Enforcement Administration

Sworn to and affirmed by telephone or other reliable electronic means,

this 8th day of June, 2020

Honorable M. DAVID WEISMAN

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case: 1:20-mc-00286 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 17 of 25 PageID #:17
ATTACHMENT A

DESCRIPTION OF ITEM TO BE SEARCHED

The cellular telephone identified as follows:

Subject Phone 3: black Sonim XP8800 cellular telephone, bearing IMEI number 

356512090110556

Case: 1:20-mc-00286 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 18 of 25 PageID #:18
ATTACHMENT B

LIST OF ITEMS TO BE SEIZED

Evidence and instrumentalities concerning violations of Title 21, United 

States Code, Sections 841 and 846, as follows: 

1. All records of telephone calls, text messages, SMS messages, picture 

messages, voicemails stored within the device, contact lists and phonebook, recent 

call activity, electronically formatted personal notes, photographic or video images, 

audio recordings, application data, browser history data, or records of appointments 

and/or reminders annotated on a calendar relating to the above-mentioned violations, 

or reflecting the identity of the user of the Subject Phones.

Case: 1:20-mc-00286 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 19 of 25 PageID #:19
ADDENDUM TO ATTACHMENT B

Pursuant to Rule 41(e)(2)(B) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, this 

warrant authorizes the removal of electronic storage media and copying of 

electronically stored information found in the premises described in Attachment A so 

that they may be reviewed in a secure environment for information consistent with 

the warrant. That review shall be conducted pursuant to the following protocol: 

The review of electronically stored information and electronic storage media 

removed from the premises described in Attachment A may include the following 

techniques (the following is a non-exclusive list, and the government may use other 

procedures that, like those listed below, minimize the review of information not 

within the list of items to be seized as set forth herein):

a. examination of all the data contained in such computer hardware, 

computer software, and/or memory storage devices to determine 

whether that data falls within the items to be seized as set forth in 

Attachment B;

b. searching for and attempting to recover any deleted, hidden, or 

encrypted data to determine whether that data falls within the list of 

items to be seized as set forth in Attachment B (any data that is 

encrypted and unreadable will not be returned unless law enforcement 

personnel have determined that the data is not (1) an instrumentality 

of the offenses, (2) a fruit of the criminal activity, (3) contraband, (4) 

otherwise unlawfully possessed, or (5) evidence of the offenses specified 

above);

c. surveying file directories and the individual files they contain to 

determine whether they include data falling within the list of items to 

be seized as set forth in Attachment B; and

d. opening or reading portions of files, and performing key word searches 

of files, in order to determine whether their contents fall within the 

items to be seized as set forth in Attachment B.

The government will return any electronic storage media removed from the 

premises described in Attachment A within 30 days of the removal unless, pursuant 

to Rule 41(c)(2) or (3) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the removed 

electronic storage media contains contraband or constitutes an instrumentality of 

crime, or unless otherwise ordered by the Court. 

Case: 1:20-mc-00286 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 20 of 25 PageID #:20
AO 93 (Rev. 11/13) Search and Seizure Warrant AUSA Christine M. O'Neill, (312) 371-0762

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, EASTERN DIVISION

In the Matter of the Search of:

Subject Phone 3, further described in Attachment A 

Case Number: 

SEARCH AND SEIZURE WARRANT

To: Alison M. Teevan and any authorized law enforcement officer

An application by a federal law enforcement officer or an attorney for the government requests the search of 

the following person or property located in the Northern District of Illinois:

See Attachment A

I find that the affidavit(s), or any recorded testimony, establish probable cause to search and seize the person 

or property described above, and that such search will reveal:

See Attachment B 

 

YOU ARE HEREBY COMMANDED to execute this warrant on or before June 22, 2020 in the daytime (6:00 

a.m. to 10:00 p.m.).

Unless delayed notice is authorized below, you must give a copy of the warrant and a receipt for the property 

taken to the person from whom, or from whose premises, the property was taken, or leave the copy and receipt at the 

place where the property was taken.

The officer executing this warrant, or an officer present during the execution of the warrant, must prepare an 

inventory as required by law and promptly return this warrant and inventory to the issuing United States Magistrate 

Judge.

Date and time issued: June 8, 2020

Judge’s signature

City and State: Chicago, Illinois M. DAVID WEISMAN, U.S. Magistrate Judge

Printed name and title

20M286

at 4:45 p.m.

Case: 1:20-mc-00286 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 21 of 25 PageID #:21
AO 93 (Rev. 11/13) Search and Seizure Warrant (Page 2)

Return

Case No: Date and Time Warrant Executed: Copy of Warrant and Inventory Left With:

Inventory made in the presence of:

Inventory of the property taken and name of any person(s) seized:

Certification

I declare under penalty of perjury that this inventory is correct and was returned along with the original warrant 

to the designated judge.

Date: 

Executing officer’s signature

Printed name and title

Case: 1:20-mc-00286 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 22 of 25 PageID #:22
ATTACHMENT A

DESCRIPTION OF ITEM TO BE SEARCHED

The cellular telephone identified as follows:

Subject Phone 3: black Sonim XP8800 cellular telephone, bearing IMEI number 

356512090110556

Case: 1:20-mc-00286 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 23 of 25 PageID #:23
ATTACHMENT B

LIST OF ITEMS TO BE SEIZED

Evidence and instrumentalities concerning violations of Title 21, United 

States Code, Sections 841 and 846, as follows: 

1. All records of telephone calls, text messages, SMS messages, picture 

messages, voicemails stored within the device, contact lists and phonebook, recent 

call activity, electronically formatted personal notes, photographic or video images, 

audio recordings, application data, browser history data, or records of appointments 

and/or reminders annotated on a calendar relating to the above-mentioned violations, 

or reflecting the identity of the user of the Subject Phones.

Case: 1:20-mc-00286 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 24 of 25 PageID #:24
ADDENDUM TO ATTACHMENT B

Pursuant to Rule 41(e)(2)(B) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, this 

warrant authorizes the removal of electronic storage media and copying of 

electronically stored information found in the premises described in Attachment A so 

that they may be reviewed in a secure environment for information consistent with 

the warrant. That review shall be conducted pursuant to the following protocol: 

The review of electronically stored information and electronic storage media 

removed from the premises described in Attachment A may include the following 

techniques (the following is a non-exclusive list, and the government may use other 

procedures that, like those listed below, minimize the review of information not 

within the list of items to be seized as set forth herein):

a. examination of all the data contained in such computer hardware, 

computer software, and/or memory storage devices to determine 

whether that data falls within the items to be seized as set forth in 

Attachment B;

b. searching for and attempting to recover any deleted, hidden, or 

encrypted data to determine whether that data falls within the list of 

items to be seized as set forth in Attachment B (any data that is 

encrypted and unreadable will not be returned unless law enforcement 

personnel have determined that the data is not (1) an instrumentality 

of the offenses, (2) a fruit of the criminal activity, (3) contraband, (4) 

otherwise unlawfully possessed, or (5) evidence of the offenses specified 

above);

c. surveying file directories and the individual files they contain to 

determine whether they include data falling within the list of items to 

be seized as set forth in Attachment B; and

d. opening or reading portions of files, and performing key word searches 

of files, in order to determine whether their contents fall within the 

items to be seized as set forth in Attachment B.

The government will return any electronic storage media removed from the 

premises described in Attachment A within 30 days of the removal unless, pursuant 

to Rule 41(c)(2) or (3) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the removed 

electronic storage media contains contraband or constitutes an instrumentality of 

crime, or unless otherwise ordered by the Court. 

Case: 1:20-mc-00286 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 25 of 25 PageID #:25