Criminal Law

In prosecution on possession of child pornography charge, Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s motion to suppress pictures contained in defendant’s cell phone, where police had seized cell phone while defendant was at halfway house serving remainder portion of sentence on prior child pornography possession conviction. Rules of halfway house precluded defendant from having cell phone, and for other residents who had permission to possess cell phone, staff at halfway house had ability to view contents of resident’s cell phone at any time. As such, defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy in his seized cell phone or its contents.

In prosecution on charge of illegal reentry into U.S. after having been deported, Dist. Ct. did not err in failing to disqualify himself from case, even though Dist. Ct. had previously served as INS District Counsel at time defendant was initially deported, and even though INS was agency responsible for said deportation. Instant prosecution stemmed from subsequent deportation that had occurred at time when Dist. Court had left INS, and record showed that Dist. Ct. had not, for purposes of section 455, participated as counsel in “current proceeding,” i.e., defendant’s criminal case, and thus was not required to disqualify himself from instant case since defendant’s deportation proceeding was separate matter. Moreover, even if deportation proceeding was operative proceeding under section 455, Dist. Ct. was not required to disqualify himself, where Dist. Ct. had not actually participated in defendant’s deportation proceeding.