Technology used to monitor individuals on computer related equipment is a permissible condition of supervised release

By: Wallin & Klarich

In July 2009, United States Secret Service obtained information that an individual in Lakewood, California was downloading child pornography from the Internet and obtained a search warrant of the home. During the execution of the search warrant, agents found Pio Quinzon occupying the home. Mr. Pio Quinzon pled guilty to possession of child pornography, which was found on his personal use computer. Several conditions were laid out for Mr. Quinzon, which included that his computer or other computer related devices used by Mr. Quinzon would be subject to installation of monitoring technology. Mr. Quizon was against the use of the monitoring technology asserting that there were other alternatives that would be less intrusive. Subsequently, the District Court sentenced Mr. Quinzon to seven years in federal prison, with thirty years of supervised release. Included in the terms of the supervised release was that Mr. Quizon was required to have technology monitoring software installed on Mr. Quinzon’s computers. Mr. Quizon countered that the monitoring was a deprivation of his liberty such that there wwere other less intrusive methods that can be employed.

The Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit, affirmed the District Court’s decision in installing monitoring technology on Mr. Quinzon’s computers. The Court of Appeal explained that monitoring of Mr. Quinzon’s may be intrusive, yet it was reasonable based on the circumstances. More importantly, the District Court only intended to monitor and view instances of Internet-related usage; rather than, monitor unrelated sources such computer documents or other miscellaneous computer files. Additionally, the Ninth Circuit argued that the condition placed on Mr. Quinzon’s were narrowly tailored as Mr. Quizon had been found with images of child pornography; thus there was a significant nexus between the use of the Internet and downloading impermissible images.

If you charged with possession of child pornography, it is important that you speak with an experienced criminal defense attorney. Our Southern California attorneys will do a thorough investigation of all the facts and raise all possible defenses. Wallin and Klarich has over 30 years of experience in dealing with these cases and has successfully defended similar individuals. Please call (888) 280-6839 anytime to speak with one our attorneys regarding your matter.

Posted In: Sex Offenses