12-29-2024, 03:22 PM
Here, there is no question that defendant had an expectation of privacy in his computer files before his computer was confiscated by police pursuant to the search warrant issued on July 17, 2013. See Heckenkamp , 482 F.3d at 1147 ; Broy , 209 F. Supp. 3d at 1053-55 ; Blair , 321 Ill. App. 3d at 381, 254 Ill.Dec. 872, 748 N.E.2d 318 (Homer, J., specially concurring). Defendant's expectation of privacy significantly diminished once the police took possession of the computer, and that diminished expectation of privacy continued until his trial was complete. See Burnette , 698 F.2d at 1049 ; Johnston , 789 F.3d at 942. However, once defendant's trial was over, defendant could again expect that he had a right to privacy in the contents of his computer. See United States v. Hubbard , 650 F.2d 293, 303 (D.C. Cir. 1980) ("the party from whom materials are seized in the course of a criminal investigation retains a protectible [sic ] property interest in the seized materials" because he is entitled to their return when the criminal proceedings conclude); Thompson , 28 N.Y.S.3d at 259 (State's unreasonable retention of an individual's files violates the individual's reasonable expectation of privacy).
People v. McCavitt, 438 Ill. Dec. 102, 110 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019)
People v. McCavitt, 438 Ill. Dec. 102, 110 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019)