Suppression of Evidence-Border Searches

Listen to this article

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: United States of America v. Marcos Mendez

Case No.: 23-1460

Officials: Easterbrook, Scudder, and Kirsch, Circuit Judges.

Focus: Suppression of Evidence-Border Searches

Mendez underwent inspection upon his return to O’Hare International Airport from a trip abroad, where customs agents, alerted by his arrest record and travel history, examined his cell phone and discovered child pornography. This led to Mendez being indicted on multiple counts related to child pornography. He sought to suppress the evidence found on his phone, arguing that the search violated his Fourth Amendment rights by lacking a warrant, probable cause, or reasonable suspicion.

The district court rejected Mendez’s motion to suppress, asserting that the search did not transgress the Fourth Amendment because customs agents had reasonable suspicion to inspect Mendez’s phone. Mendez subsequently pleaded guilty to one count of producing child pornography but reserved his right to challenge the district court’s suppression motion ruling.

In the Seventh Circuit, Mendez contended that Supreme Court precedents like Riley v. California and Carpenter v. United States mandated a warrant, probable cause, or at least reasonable suspicion for phone searches. However, the Court of Appeals disagreed, highlighting that border searches do not necessitate a warrant or probable cause. It determined that the routine, manual examination of Mendez’s phone required no specific suspicion. Aligning with the consensus of other circuits, the court affirmed the district court’s decision that searches of electronic devices at the border do not demand a warrant or probable cause.

Affirmed.

Decided 06/10/24

Full Text