The Use of a Ruse by Law Enforcement

Law Enforcement’s Use of a Ruse and the Fourth Amendment

Lawful vs. Unlawful Ruses

A law enforcement officer may not constitutionally use a ruse that involves him misrepresenting his or her authority.  A federal officer claiming to be a state law enforcement officer, and luring a suspect back to the scene of the execution of a search warrant under false pretenses, violates the public trust and is a Fourth Amendment violation.

Investigating the Internet distribution of child pornography, the FBI looked into something called “BitTorrent,” described as a file sharing network that is publicly available and which uses peer-to-peer file-sharing, allowing a computer to share and download files from other computers.  This led to an Internet protocol (“IP”) address at an account registered to defendant Stefan Ramirez’s at his home address in Fresno.  In checking defendant’s IP address, the FBI conducted 23 separate download sessions in November and December 2016, involving over 4,000 still images and 20 videos of suspected child pornography.  Conducting a physical surveillance on defendant’s home in Fresno, it was noted that a white Chrysler sedan, registered to defendant, was often parked in the driveway.  Knowing from experience that computers and other electronic storage devices were commonly stored in one’s vehicle, and that someone at that residence—possibly defendant—was “involved in (the) possession, receipt, and/or distribution of child pornography,” Special Agent Joshua Ratzlaff obtained a search warrant for the residence along with any “[v]ehicles located at or near the premises that fall under the dominion and control of (defendant) or any other occupant of the premises.”  Defendant himself was not specifically named as a person to be searched because although the identified Internet account was in defendant’s name, several people were known to live there and it was not yet known for sure who at the residence might be receiving the child pornography.  The ....