163976P.pdf   07/24/2017  United States  v.  Steven Horton
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  16-3976
                          and No:  16-3982
   U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Council Bluffs   
   [PUBLISHED] [Smith, Author, with Shepherd, Circuit Judge, and Fenner, 
   District Judge] 
   Criminal case - Criminal law. The district court erred in granting 
   defendants' motion to suppress evidence obtained through a warrant 
   authorizing a search of their computers through the use of a Network 
   Investigative Technique (NIT); the NIT warrant issued in this case was 
   issued in violation of Fed. R. Crim. P. 41 and exceeded the magistrate 
   judge's jurisdiction because a magistrate judge in one jurisdiction (here, 
   the Eastern District of Virginia) cannot authorize the search of the 
   content of a computer in another jurisdiction (here, the Southern District 
   of Iowa) and none of the exceptions to Fed. R. Crim. P. Rule 41 suggested 
   by the government, including the tracking-device exception in Rule 
   41(b)(4), apply here; while the warrant was void ab initio, the Leon 
   exception can apply to such situations and Leon should be applied here as 
   there was no bad faith or reckless disregard for the truth; further the 
   marginal benefit of deterring such warrants would be outweighed by the 
   heavy costs to the justice system of such a ruling. Judge Fenner, 
   concurring in part and dissenting in part.