United States v. David Bishop Laist

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the twenty-five-day warrantless seizure of the defendant’s computer and hard drives was reasonable
• holding that a 25- day delay between a seizure and a warrant was permissible
• noting that because there is no “per se rule of unreasonableness,” the “devil . . . is in the details”
• explaining that the government retained a “legitimate interest in maintaining custody of the computer and hard drives as substantial evidence of a serious federal crime”
• providing that “the possessory interest in a computer derives from its highly personal contents”
• weighing in the government’s favor the fact that the “investigation took roughly a year and involved the efforts of numerous FBI agents”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).