United States v. LaPradd, 051412 FED6, 11-5474
|Party Name:||UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. KENNETH LAPRADD, Defendant-Appellant.|
|Judge Panel:||Before: MOORE, GIBBONS, and ALARC|
|Case Date:||May 14, 2012|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit|
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION
ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
Kenneth LaPradd appeals from the district court's order denying his motion to suppress. LaPradd was indicted on one count of knowing receipt of child pornography and one count of knowing possession of child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(2)(B) and § 2252A(a)(5)(B). In his motion to suppress, LaPradd alleged that the officers lacked probable cause to arrest him and to seize incriminating evidence supporting his indictment for child pornography. We have jurisdiction over this appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. For the reasons that follow, we affirm the district court's denial of LaPradd's motion to suppress.
The following facts have been gleaned from the testimony presented at the suppression hearing held on September 21, 2010.
During the summer of 2009, Kenneth LaPradd used the public computers at the University of Louisville Art Library to look at images of nude minors. On August 6, 2009, several library patrons reported to Gail Gilbert, Director of the library, that LaPradd was viewing "awful" and "inappropriate" images. Gilbert reported LaPradd's activity to the University of Louisville Police Department ("ULPD"). The ULPD told her to inform them if LaPradd returned. When LaPradd returned the following day, Gilbert called the ULPD. ULPD Officers Danny Willoughby, David James, and Jacklyn Cohn went to the library to investigate Gilbert's report.
The officers observed LaPradd through a window as he viewed what appeared to be images of nude children. They entered the library, approached LaPradd, explained to him why they were there, and asked him to step outside to talk. LaPradd followed Officer James and Officer Willoughby to the hallway voluntarily. There, he waived his Miranda rights before answering any questions. Officer Cohn remained at the computer terminal to review the images LaPradd had been viewing.
Officer James asked LaPradd whether he had been viewing and downloading child pornography on the computer and if he had a flash drive containing child pornography. LaPradd answered, "Yes, " to both questions and added that "some photographers would argue that it's not child pornography."
Officer Cohn joined Officer James and Officer Willoughby in the hallway. She told them that she had looked at LaPradd's computer screen and observed images of nude or partially nude minors and their genitalia. She did not recall at the time of the suppression hearing whether the images depicted children engaged in sexual acts.
The officers arrested LaPradd for violating Kentucky Revised Statute § 531.335 and seized the library computer that LaPradd had been using and the flash drive he had inserted in the computer. Kentucky Revised Statute § 531.335 provides as follows:
(1)A person is guilty of possession of matter portraying a sexual performance by a minor when, having knowledge of its content, character, and that the sexual...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP