Us V.C Ziegler Case Brief

U.S. v. Ziegler, 474 F.3d 1184 (9th Cir. 2007) (p. 485)

Syllabus

Frontline, a company processing online electronic payments, employed Jeff Ziegler The FBI received a confirmed tip that Ziegler accessed child pornography from his office computer. Frontline employees copied Ziegler’s hard rive per their understanding of FBI instructions The employees got a key to Ziegler’s office from the Chief Financial Officer of Frontline. Frontline later told the FBI that it would voluntarily turn over Ziegler’s computer. The FBI searched the hard drive and found child pornography images, and Ziegler was charged with various crimes as a result. Ziegler sought to suppress the evidence claiming the search was a violation of his Fourth Amendment rights. The federal trial court denied the motion, and the appellate court affirmed.

Answers to Ziegler Questions (p. 486)

1a. He had a private office which was locked and not shared with co-workers. His computer was password-protected. An employment manual informed employees of the company monitoring policy.

1b. The search was authorized by company officers with the authority to do so.

1c. Frontline exercised common authority over Ziegler’s computer because it owned and had complete access to all employee computers. With the knowledge of employees, Frontline monitored Internet traffic and employees were instructed against using computers for personal business.

2. The appeals court affirmed the trial court’s suppression of evidence gained from the warrantless search of the office and computer. The employee has a reasonable expectation of privacy as the computer was in a private, locked office, and it was not networked to other computers. Further, the court noted that there was no written employee manual informing employees of possible monitoring. See State v. Young, 974 So. 2d 601 (Fl. App. 1 Dist. 2008).