I don't disagree that parts of this seizure should get more scrutiny I don't support a special master for the plain view (as opposed to privilege), not least bc Trump endorsed expansive plain view in 702.https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/michael-cohens-files-need-independent-review/2018/04/19/1cc23fba-434f-11e8-ad8f-27a8c409298b_story.html?utm_term=.e6293b9415b6 …
-
Can you elaborate a bit on the plain view issue? I thought if govt reviews docs and sees evidence of crime (that’s not priv.) they can use even if not covered by warrants?
That's what plain view is, but in light of Riley and some circuit stuff (NAL), there's the sense that searches of electronic devices should be more tailored. I agree with that, but I was hoping Cohen would set precedent.
-
-
Ty. So the fact that a document is physical vs digital means there are different legal issues at play depending which format it’s in?
-
Not yet, at least not in all circuits (this is why I said NAL bc I don't know what precedent is in 2c). But courts are moving in that direction and this is a case that demonstrates the issues very well.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.