US v. Nkongho: Starting in 2016, various persons ran a scheme in which they posed as US Navy personnel to procure equipment without actually paying for it. The mastermind of the scheme was arrested, imprisoned, and deported to Nigeria, but his wife, Nkongho, remained in the United States, where she “handled the money for the organization.” She, too, came under investigation and, when returning from a trip to Cuba with her children, was stopped by authorities, who seized several electronic devices. After debating (for nine days) whether a warrant was needed to search them, warrants were obtained. Evidence from the devices later played a key part in the Government’s evidence at Nkongho’s trial. She was convicted of conspiracy to launder money and money laundering related to the scheme. She was sentenced to 24 months in prison, a significant downward variance.
On appeal, the Fourth Circuit affirmed Nkongho’s convictions and sentence. Nkongho’s primary argument on appeal was that the district court had erred when it denied her motion to suppress the evidence recovered from the devices that had been seized when she returned from Cuba. Nkogho conceded that there was probable cause to seize her devices for committing a domestic offense – which would not trigger the border exception to the Fourth Amendment – there was not similar evidence of international offenses “tethered enough to the exception’s justifications of stopping transnational crime.” The court disagreed, concluding that there was “probable cause to believe that Nkongho was part of an international munitions export scheme,” noting that such cause was found nine days later when the search warrants were obtained. The court also rejected the argument that the obtaining of the warrants was untimely, given that the reason for the delay was uncertainty as to the law regarding the necessity of warrants in that context.
No comments:
Post a Comment