U.S. v. Kaechele
| Decision Date | 29 November 2006 |
| Docket Number | No. 05-80441.,05-80441. |
| Citation | 466 F.Supp.2d 868 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Karl R. KAECHELE, Jr., Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Michigan |
Jennifer M. Gorland, John N. O'Brien, II, U.S. Attorney'S Office, Detroit, MI, for Plaintiff.
William L. Cataldo, William L. Cataldo Assoc., Southfield, MI, for Defendant.
Defendant Karl R. Kaechele, Jr. is charged in an April 11, 2006 second superseding indictment with three counts of traveling abroad with the intent to engage in illicit sexual conduct, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2423(b). Through the present motions, filed on March 22, 2006, Defendant seeks: (i) to suppress the evidence obtained during the execution of a warrant authorizing the search of a computer at Defendant's residence -in St. Petersburg, Florida; (ii) to exclude from the evidence at trial certain journals and statements taken from Defendant at the time of his April 26, 2005 arrest at the Detroit Metropolitan Airport following his return from southeast Asia; and (iii) the dismissal of the indictment on the grounds that 18 U.S.C. § 2423(b) is unconstitutionally over broad and vague, among other purported infirmities.
Defendant's three motions were addressed at a hearing held on August 8, 2006. Having reviewed Defendant's motions and the Government's responses, and having considered the arguments of counsel at the August 8 hearing, the Court now is prepared to rule on these motions. This opinion and order sets forth the Court's rulings.
On April 26, 2005, Defendant Karl R. Kaechele, Jr. arrived at the Detroit Metropolitan Airport on Northwest Flight 26 from Manila in the Philippines. During a routine customs inspection of Defendant's. luggage, federal Customs and Border Protection ("CBP") officers discovered nine packets of photographs, many of which depicted nude Asian women. The backs of these photographs had handwritten notations that appeared to reflect the names of the women, the dates of the photos, and log numbers.
During their search of Defendant's luggage, the CBP agents also discovered several journals that appeared to contain detailed notes regarding Defendant's most recent and prior travels to Southeast Asia. These journals included specific and graphic descriptions of sexual encounters With females, including such details as the date of the encounter, the name and age of the female, the city where the encounter occurred, a rating of the encounter, the amount of money paid, and a log number of the photo taken of the female. According to the journal entries, many of these sexual encounters involved young girls between the ages of 8 and 15. The search of Defendant's belongings also revealed a travel list, dated the day of Defendant's departure from the United States, that included such items as Viagra, KY jelly, and penicillin, and Defendant was found to be carrying Kamagra, a "knock-off' form of Viagra.
In an interview by Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE") agents following Miranda warnings, Defendant acknowledged having traveled to Southeast Asia nine times in the previous five years. Defendant also admitted that the journals found in his luggage belonged to him, and that he had made the entries in these journals. Defendant further acknowledged that he took numerous photographs of females while abroad, but indicated that he does not bring back photos of young girls for fear of getting in trouble with customs officials.1 Finally, Defendant stated that he had used a computer at his residence to make online reservations for his overseas travel, and he acknowledged having an e-mail account and an Internet service that he had used to view nude images online.
Further investigation revealed that Defendant had spent nine of the previous twelve months in Southeast Asia, traveling there on four separate occasions. These travel dates were found to be consistent with the dates of the entries in his journals describing sexual encounters with females. Accordingly, on April 27, 2005, Defendant was charged in a criminal complaint with traveling in foreign commerce to engage in illicit sexual conduct, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2423(c), and Magistrate Judge Majzoub issued a warrant for his arrest.
Defendant subsequently was charged in a May 5, 2005 indictment with a single count of traveling abroad between February 1 and April 26, 2005 for the purpose of engaging in a commercial sex act, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2423(b). This indictment has twice been superseded, with Defendant now facing three separate charges of traveling in foreign commerce for the purpose of engaging in illicit sexual conduct, covering the periods of February 1 through April 26, 2005 (count one), January 31 through February 21, 2004 (count two), and June 1 through June 20, 2004 (count three).
As noted at the outset, Defendant has filed three motions that the Court addressed with counsel at an August 8, 2006 hearing and subsequently took under advisement., First; Defendant seeks to suppress the evidence seized during the execution of a warrant authorizing the search of a computer at his residence in St. Petersburg, Florida. Next, he has filed a motion in limine seeking to preclude the Government from offering into evidence at trial certain journals found in his possession and statements lie allegedly made at the time of his April 26, 2005 arrest at the Detroit Metropolitan Airport following his return from the Philippines. Finally, Defendant has moved for the dismissal of the indictment on the ground that 18 U.S.C. § 2423(b) is unconstitutional in various respects. The Court addresses each of these motions in turn.
Following Defendant's arrest in late April of 2005, Special Agent James F. Rankin of the Department of Homeland Security sought a warrant to search Defendant's residence in St. Petersburg, Florida. In his May 2, 2005 application for this warrant, Agent Rankin set forth all of the information outlined above, and further stated that Defendant's journals included entries describing sexual encounters with females of unknown ages in Florida. Finally, Agent Rankin noted that Defendant's Florida residence was directly across from an elementary school, with two churches, a Christian academy, and several public parks also located within a few blocks of this residence. This proximity, along with the entries in Defendant's journals reflecting overseas sexual encounters with girls as young as eight years old and sexual activity with females of unknown age in the local area of his Florida residence, led Agent Rankin to conclude that Defendant "fits the profile for a pedophile." (Defendant's Motion, Ex. B, Search Warrant Aff. at ¶ 6.)
Agent Rankin's affidavit then set forth the grounds for his belief that there was probable cause to search Defendant's Florida residence for evidence of criminal activity. First, Agent Rankin cited his years of training and experience in investigating violations of federal law, including the laws and regulations regarding the import and export of prohibited items, child pornography, and crimes involving the use of computers. The agent also cited his training and experience in the methods used by travelers who import sexually illicit materials or travel overseas for the purpose of engaging in illicit sexual conduct.
Applying this experience and training to the facts learned in the investigation of Defendant, Agent Rankin opined that there was reason to believe, in light of the detailed entries in Defendant's journals and his evident habit of logging and photographing his sex partners, that photographic "trophy" images similar to those found in Defendant's possession would be found on Defendant's home computer. Agent Rankin further observed that Defendant's statement to customs officials regarding his reluctance to bring back photos of young girls from his overseas trips appeared deceptive in its wording, suggesting a probability that Defendant instead might have sent such photos via electronic means for access from his home computer. As additional grounds for searching the computer at Defendant's residence, the agent cited Defendant's express admissions that he had Internet access and an e-mail account, that he had used the internet to make online reservations for his most recent Southeast Asia trip, and that he had viewed nude images online.
As discussed in greater detail below, the application in support of the search warrant cited only a suspected violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A — a federal statute outlawing the shipment, receipt, or distribution of child pornography — as supplying probable cause to search Defendant's residence for evidence or the fruits of criminal activity. In Agent Rankin's accompanying affidavit, however, which was incorporated by reference into the application, the agent set forth his further conclusion that there also was probable cause to believe that Defendant was "involved in traveling in foreign commerce and engaging in illicit sexual conduct with another person in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 2423." (Defendant's Motion, Ex. B, Search Warrant Aff. at ¶ 24.) This latter statute, of course, is the one that Defendant is charged with violating in this case.
Based on this application and affidavit, Magistrate Judge Thomas B. McCoun III of the Middle District of Florida issued a warrant to search Defendant's St. Petersburg residence for various items, including (i) computer hardware or software "that may be, or are used to book online foreign travel and to store or view images of the illicit activity," (ii) "[a]ny and all computer software," (iii) any and all documents or records in any medium,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Saiz
...v. Pennell , 737 F.2d 521, 537 (6th Cir. 1984) ; United States v. Head , 546 F.2d 6, 9 (2d Cir. 1976) ; United States v. Kaechele , 466 F.Supp.2d 868, 890-91 (E.D. Mich. 2006) ; People v. Chan , 128 Cal.App.4th 408, 26 Cal.Rptr.3d 878, 886 (2005) ; State v. Johnson , 821 P.2d 1150, 1162 (Ut......
-
State v. Saiz
...States v. Pennell, 737 F.2d 521, 537 (6th Cir. 1984); United States v. Head, 546 F.2d 6, 9 (2d Cir. 1976); United States v. Kaechele, 466 F. Supp. 2d 868, 890-91 (E.D. Mich. 2006); People v. Chan, 26 Cal. Rptr. 3d 878, 886 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005); State v. Johnson, 821 P.2d 1150, 1162 (Utah 19......
-
State Of Ohio v. Mccrory
...of telling investigators how to conduct a lawful investigation, something the courts are ill-equipped to do"); United States v. Kaechele (E.D.Mich. 2006), 466 F.Supp.2d 868, 888 ("To require a pinpointed computer search, restricting the search to an email program or to specific search terms......
-
People v. Malburg
...with particularity the crime which the evidence will show was committed. At least one court has questioned Abboud. In U. S. v. Kaechele (E.D. Mich. 2006) 466 F.Supp.2d 868, the court felt "compelled to express its concern with the ruling in Abboud, which seemingly rests upon a questionable ......
-
Swinging for the fences: how Comprehensive Drug Testing, Inc. missed the ball on digital searches.
...Dec. 3, 2007); United States v. Kearns, No. l:05-CR-146-WSD-JMF, 2006 WL 2668544 (N.D. Ga. Feb. 21, 2006); United States v. Kaechele, 466 F. Supp. 2d 868 (E.D. Mich. 2006); United States v. Welch, 401 F. Supp. 2d 1172 (D. Kan. 2005); United States v. Hill, 322 F. Supp. 2d 1081 (C.D. Cal. 20......