Page 34 - TPA Journal July August 2017

Second, Jarman is not entitled to suppression
under the Fourth Amendment because the
duration of the Government’s review of the
seized data was reasonable under the circum-
stances. The taint process here was designed to
protect Jarman’s clients’ privileged informa-
tion. Courts have recognized that, in such cir-
cumstances, it is appropriate to screen privi-
leged information. Moreover, the taint team
review only took eight months. And the
Government completed its forensic examina-
tion less than four months after it received the
last of the hard drives and computers from the
taint team. These periods are within the typical
periods of delay in executing warrants that
courts have permitted due to the complexity
involved in searching computers.
Moreover, Jarman has not argued that the delay
caused the warrant to become stale. Even if he
had, “[n]umerous cases hold that a delay of
several months” or even years “between the
seizure of electronic evidence and the comple-
tion of the government’s review of [it] . . . is
reasonable” and does not render the warrant
stale, especially in child-pornography cases.
For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the
district court is AFFIRMED.
U.S. v. Jarman, No. 16-30468, 5th Cir., Feb. 01,
2017.
HHHHHHHHHHHH
30 www.texaspoliceassociation.com • 866-997-8282
ROBBERY ELEMENTS – BUTTER KNIFE AS A
DEADLY WEAPON
The issue in this case is whether there is suffi-
cient evidence to affirm the jury’s deadly-
weapon finding elevating robbery to aggravat-
ed robbery. Because we conclude that there is
and that the court of appeals erred to hold oth-
erwise, we will reverse its judgment and
remand this cause for the lower court to
address Appellant’s remaining points of error.
Kevin Kimp, Appellant, was charged by indict-
ment with aggravated 1 robbery after he
robbed two cashiers working at a RaceTrac
convenience store using a butter knife. The
indictment alleged that Kimp intentionally or
knowingly threatened (Amelia) or placed her
in fear of imminent bodily injury or death
while in the course of committing robbery. It
further alleged that Kimp used or exhibited a
deadly weapon, to wit: a knife that in the
manner of its use or intended use was capable
of causing death or serious bodily injury. Both
aggravated robbery and the lesser-included
offense of robbery were submitted to the jury,
and the jury found Kimp guilty of aggravated
robbery. In accordance with the jury’s verdict,
the judge entered a deadly-weapon finding.
Kimp appealed his conviction, and the court of
appeals reversed, holding that there was insuf-
ficient evidence to sustain the deadly-weapon
finding.
The night of the robbery, two employees were
working at the RaceTrac: Amelia who was the
cashier and Aaron Martinez (Aaron), the night
Texas Police Journal