Submitted: March 13, 2015.
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis.
For United States of America, Plaintiff - Appellee: Erin Granger, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Robert F. Livergood, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, Eastern District of Missouri, Saint Louis, MO.
Paul Beckmann, Defendant - Appellant, Pro se, Arnold, MO.
For Paul Beckmann, Defendant - Appellant: Daniel Allan Juengel, Saint Louis, MO.
Before MURPHY and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges, and HARPOOL, District Judge.
HARPOOL, District Judge.
Paul Beckmann pled guilty to one count of possession of child pornography after having been previously convicted and sentenced for possession of child pornography in 2001. See 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(5)(B), (b)(2). The district court sentenced Beckmann to 120 months of imprisonment, a lifetime of supervised release, and ordered him to pay $9,000 of restitution. On appeal, Beckmann asserts that the district court erred by: (1) denying his motion to suppress evidence found on an external hard drive as the result of an illegal search under the Fourth Amendment; (2) denying his motion to suppress evidence as the result of an intentional and deliberate violation of Rule 41; and (3) ordering restitution in the amount of $9,000. We affirm.
Since Beckmann's conviction for possession of child pornography in 2001, Beckmann has been required to register as a sex offender. On August 2, 2011, as part of a routine sex offender verification through the United States Marshal's Office, Jefferson County Deputies Barbato and Thebeau visited Beckmann's home. The purpose of the visit was to verify Beckmann's address and to ensure that he was complying with any conditions related to his status as a sex offender.
Upon arrival, the deputies knocked on Beckmann's door, told him they were there for sex offender verification and asked to enter his home. Beckmann consented. Once inside, the deputies observed a laptop computer on the coffee table. Beckmann informed the officers that he was
under no supervised release conditions and that he was lawfully allowed to have a computer and internet access. Deputy Barbato asked to look through the contents of Beckmann's laptop in order to " make sure he was not accessing any content he's not supposed to be accessing." Beckmann consented. While Deputy Barbato searched the laptop, Beckmann showed Deputy Thebeau around the rest of the residence. Deputy Thebeau alerted Deputy Barbato that there was another computer in the upstairs office. He then obtained permission to use the upstairs restroom. Deputy Barbato proceeded upstairs partially for safety reasons and partially because he wanted to make sure Defendant was not " going through anything he shouldn't be."
When Deputy Barbato arrived upstairs and looked into the office where Beckmann went, he saw a computer desk with a monitor on it and Beckmann underneath messing with wires/cords. To alert Beckmann to his presence, Deputy Barbato asked Beckmann if this was the " other" computer. Beckmann seemed startled and responded yes. Deputy Barbato ...