Opinion ID: 183984
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 13

Heading: A.4. Execution of State Search Warrant

Text: As previously discussed, Agent Albanese obtained the state search warrant on October 19, 2006. In mid-November, Detective Vanadia commenced a warranted search of the 120 GB hard drive solely for evidence of financial crimes. [12] During this search, Vanadia noticed a folder named Kazvid. The folder contained files bearing names indicative of child pornography. Vanadia then opened these files and confirmed that they did contain child pornography. Stabile argued that this search violated the Fourth Amendment and that the fruits of the search had to be suppressed. The District Court first determined that Detective Vanadia lawfully opened the Kazvid folder. The District Court then found that the file names of the files in the Kazvid folder were in plain view, but that the plain view doctrine did not encompass the contents of those files. However, the District Court determined that Vanadia's decision to view the contents of the files, although violative of the Fourth Amendment, did not require suppression because of the inevitable discovery doctrine. On appeal, Stabile challenges each step of this search, arguing that: (1) Detective Vanadia improperly opened the Kazvid folder; (2) that the plain view doctrine should not apply to the file names found in the Kazvid folder; and (3) that the inevitable discovery and independent source doctrines do not apply and therefore this evidence must be suppressed. The Government contends that the plain view doctrine applies not only to the names of the files in the Kazvid folder but also to all the contents of those files. For the reasons that follow, we determine that Detective Vanadia properly opened that Kazvid folder; that the names of the files in that folder were in plain view; and that although under the facts of this case the plain view doctrine may not apply to the contents of those files, the independent source and inevitable discovery doctrines apply to the contents of the files, thereby removing any need for suppression. Therefore, we will affirm the District Court's decision.