Thursday, September 12, 2013
Orin Kerr has this post at The Volokh Conspiracy, excerpting a recent case in part as follows:
Deleting the photograph from plaintiff’s camera amounted to no more than a de minimis violation. The photograph had little to no monetary value, no identifiable non-monetary value, and could easily have been recreated by plaintiff. Thus, McIntyre’s deletion of the photograph was akin to the destruction of trace amounts of cocaine described in Jacobsen, and significantly less severe than the property damage described in Porter and Jewell. Because McIntyre’s deletion of a single photograph from plaintiff’s digital camera constituted only a de minimis violation of plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment rights, McIntyre cannot be held liable under the Fourth Amendment for his actions.