Summary
The Ninth Circuit affirmed the denial of Dontae Hunt’s motion to suppress and recusal motion, as well as his conviction and sentence. The court held that Hunt had not abandoned his privacy interest in a black iPhone dropped after he was shot, but concluded that the government did not violate the Fourth Amendment because it obtained a warrant and retained the phone for a reasonable period. The court also held that the district judge’s prior service as U.S. Attorney during an unrelated prosecution of Hunt did not require recusal.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court judge was required to recuse herself under 28 U.S.C. § 455(a) because, while serving as United States Attorney, her office had previously prosecuted Hunt in an unrelated case.
- Whether Hunt abandoned his reasonable expectation of privacy in a black iPhone and its data when he dropped the phone after being shot.
- Whether the government's seizure and retention of the black iPhone violated the Fourth Amendment because the phone was held for an unreasonably long period before the warrant-authorized search.
Holdings
- A judge need not recuse under 28 U.S.C. § 455(a) merely because, more than fifteen years earlier, the judge served as United States Attorney while her office prosecuted the defendant in an unrelated case, where there is no factual connection between the cases and the judge had no personal recollection or bias.
- The abandonment doctrine applies to cellphones and cellphone data, but courts must analyze the intent to abandon the physical device separately from the intent to abandon the data stored on it.
- Hunt did not abandon his privacy interest in the black iPhone or its data by dropping the phone while fleeing after being shot.
- The government's seizure and retention of the black iPhone did not violate the Fourth Amendment because police reasonably collected it as evidence and held it until an owner could be identified, and agents later obtained a warrant to search its data within a reasonable period.
Key quotations
“When determining a person’s intent to abandon, courts should analyze the intent to abandon the device separately from the intent to abandon its data.” (4)
“We, however, reject Hunt and amici’s invitation to jettison the abandonment doctrine for digital data.” (11)
“We thus hold that the district court clearly erred in finding that Hunt intended to abandon the black iPhone, and it logically follows that he did not intend to abandon the data in it.” (17)
“To remain reasonable, a seizure must last “no longer than reasonably necessary for the police, acting with diligence, to obtain the warrant” to search the property.” (18)
Factual background
Hunt was shot five times while walking near his apartment and dropped a black iPhone and a Gucci satchel. Police recovered the phone near shrubs at the scene, retained it as evidence for more than two years, and later obtained a warrant to search its data during an unrelated drug investigation. Hunt argued that he had not abandoned his privacy interest in the phone and that the prolonged retention violated the Fourth Amendment. The district judge had previously been the United States Attorney when her office prosecuted Hunt for unrelated charges more than fifteen years earlier.
Procedural history
Federal agents obtained a warrant to search a black iPhone that Eugene police had recovered near the scene where Hunt had been shot. Evidence from that phone and a premises search supported Hunt's convictions for drug-trafficking, firearm, conspiracy, and money-laundering offenses. Before trial, Hunt moved to suppress the phone evidence and sought recusal of the district judge, who had previously served as the United States Attorney when her office prosecuted Hunt in an unrelated case; the district court denied both motions, and Hunt appealed.