US v. Nichols, No. 09-1165

By FindLaw Staff on July 29, 2009 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

Conviction for producing visual depictions of child pornography is affirmed where: 1) the district court did not err in denying defendant's motion to suppress evidence seized during the search of his home as the co-occupant of the house who had unlimited and joint access to the computer and related equipment where child pornography was found had common authority to consent to a search, and even if she lacked such authority the police acted reasonably in believing she had the authority to consent; 2) the court did not err in denying his motion to dismiss the indictment as the court had jurisdiction over the matter since all of the photographic and computer equipment used in the offense was manufactured outside of the state.    

Read US v. Nichols, No. 09-1165

Appellate Information
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas.
Submitted: June 8, 2009
Filed: July 29, 2009

Before WOLLMAN, MURPHY, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.
Opinion by MELLOY, Circuit Judge.

Copied to clipboard