ppellate court judges Friday dismissed 20 counts of possessing child pornography against a 38-year-old Haines City man, saying a search of his cellphone had been improper.
The 2-1 decision from a three-judge panel of the Lakeland-based 2nd District Court of Appeal was based on a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling that protects cellphone data from unauthorized searches.
Matthew Willis pleaded no contest in July 2013 to 20 counts of possessing child pornography and driving with a suspended license, according to the plea agreement, and he has served more than a year of his six-year prison sentence.
However, he was only sentenced to 60 days for a driving with a suspended license charge, and that was the only charge left intact by the appeals court judges.
"We are reviewing the opinion and will be consulting with the (Florida) Attorney General's Office to determine if we can appeal this decision to the Florida Supreme Court," Chief Assistant State Attorney Brian Haas said.
During a traffic stop in February 2012, Haines City police officers found drugs in Willis' vehicle and, without a warrant, began searching his cellphone. That's when the officers came across more than 3,000 images of child pornography, according to the opinion released Friday.
Appellate Judge Chris Altenbernd wrote Friday's opinion, with appellate Judge Darryl Casanueva agreeing. Altenbernd said the images obtained from Willis' cellphone were "an obvious problem with the fruit of the poisonous tree" because of a June 25 Supreme Court ruling involving warrantless searches of cellphones.
Appellate Judge Robert Morris disagreed, and in a dissenting opinion he said the question wasn't whether officers were in lawful possession of the cellphone, but whether the search falls under a good-faith exception that allows evidence to be submitted if officers had a reason to believe their actions were legal.
On Feb. 7, 2012, Willis was driving a Ford pickup with two passengers when he was pulled over by a Haines City police officer for a broken license plate light, the opinion states.
When the officer discovered Willis was driving with a suspended license, he arrested Willis and put him in the back of the patrol car. Additional officers arrived to conduct an inventory search of the vehicle after the arrest, the opinion states.
Officers unlocked the glove box and found marijuana and methamphetamine inside two pill bottles, one of which had the name of one of the truck's passengers on it, the opinion states. An electronic scale was also found inside the truck, and officers arrested Willis and the passenger for possession of marijuana and meth with intent to sell.
Before his vehicle was towed and before he was transferred to booking, Willis asked officers to get his cellphone from his truck. An officer then began looking through the contents of the phone, expecting to find evidence related to drug dealing.
In the process, he came across the child pornography, the opinion states.
Police then applied for a warrant to search the phone's contents related to drugs or children involved in sexual content, saying the officer initially looked through the phone to "determine ownership," the opinion states.
In the application for the warrant, officers failed to mention the two passengers with Willis, failed to say the name of one of the passengers was written on a pill bottle containing marijuana and meth, failed to say they arrested Willis and the passenger for possession with intent to sell, and failed to say the officers found a scale in the truck.
Altenbernd wrote that if police didn't know about the images on the cellphone, they would only know the phone belonged to Willis and that the name of his passenger was on the pill bottle containing drugs, which was locked in the glove compartment.
"(It) clearly would not have provided probable cause to search the personal photographs of Willis' cellphone," Altenbernd wrote in the opinion. Before trial, Willis requested that a judge throw out the evidence obtained from the cellphone.
When his request was denied, Willis pleaded no contest in July 2013 and was sentenced to six years in prison followed by six years of probation as a sex offender, the opinion states. The state dropped 20 of the 40 counts of possessing child pornography in exchange for his plea. ..Source.. by Cody Dulaney
No comments:
Post a Comment
We use the Disqus Commenting system, please wait for it to load. Also, comments are moderated, please stick to the issue of the post, as we are trying to have an intelligent, relevant discussion which develops the post. Comments deviating from topic of post will not be posted. Thanks