United States v. Robert E. Gibeault, Jr.


20-1003-cr United States of America v. Robert E. Gibeault, Jr. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT’S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 8th day of December, two thousand twenty-one. PRESENT: GUIDO CALABRESI, DENNY CHIN, WILLIAM J. NARDINI, Circuit Judges. _______________________________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v. No. 20-1003-cr ROBERT E. GIBEAULT, JR., Defendant-Appellant. _______________________________________ For Appellee: CARINA H. SCHOENBERGER, Assistant United States Attorney, for Antoinette T. Bacon, Acting United States Attorney for the Northern District of New York, Syracuse, NY, for Appellee. For Defendant-Appellant: DANIEL M. PEREZ, Law Offices of Daniel M. Perez, Newton, NJ, for Defendant- Appellant. On appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York (Mae A. D’Agostino, J.). UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment of conviction and sentence entered by the district court on March 16, 2020, is AFFIRMED. Defendant-Appellant Robert E. Gibeault, Jr. appeals from a judgment of conviction and sentence entered by the district court on March 16, 2020, pursuant to a conditional plea agreement between Gibeault, Jr. and the Government dated October 18, 2019. On appeal, Gibeault, Jr. challenges the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence and request for an evidentiary hearing pursuant to Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (1978). We assume the reader’s familiarity with the underlying record. In 2017, law enforcement officers conducted undercover investigations on the BitTorrent peer-to-peer file-sharing network in which they downloaded several files depicting child pornography from a user with the IP address 72.244.103.211 (the “IP address”). Special Agent James Hamilton (“SA Hamilton”) from the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement Office of Homeland Security Investigations (“HSI”) determined that the IP address was assigned to an account registered to “Robert Gibeault” residing at 321 Old West Road, Gansevoort, New York 12831 (“321 Old West Road” or the “property”). Further investigation revealed that “Robert E. Gibeault” and “Jill A. Gibeault” lived at 321 Old West Road. SA Hamilton then surveilled the property and discovered that the home had two available wireless network connections and a single mailbox with the number 321. SA Hamilton then obtained a search warrant from a federal magistrate judge. The search warrant identified as the places and items to be searched “the property located at 321 Old West …

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals