People v. Ulloa
101 Cal.App.4TH 1000 (2002)
Court of Appeal of California, 4th Appellate District

Facts: San Bernardino County’s police were investigating a report that the defendant, Ulloa had committed sodomy and oral copulation on a fifteen-year-old boy. The boy told the officers that he had met Ulloa on the internet via AOL Instant Messaging communication. Police obtained a warrant in the course of their investigation to search Ulloa’s home for correspondence, which relates to the exploitation of children, and computers containing any of such items. The officers found copies of incriminating AOL instant messaging communication between Ulloa and the victim. Then, they seized the messages to later be used against Ulloa at his trial. The evidence led to his conviction. Gustavo Ulloa was charged with two counts of sodomy of a person …show more content…
(2) Did the affidavit establish probable cause to such search?

Holding: (1) Even though the warrant did not authorize a search for the messages in his computer, the court ruled that particular language in the warrant, which purpose is to search for evidence relating to the exploitation of children, implied an authorized search for the messages. (2) The court holds that there was sufficient circumstantial evidence that the defendant stored the instant messages in his personal computer

Reasoning: Ulloa argued that the AOL Instant Messages should have been suppressed because, (1) the warrant did not specifically authorize a search for them, and (2) a probable cause to believe he owned a computer in which he stored all the messages wasn’t established in the affidavit. He contended that even if the warrant authorized a search, the supporting affidavit failed to demonstrate probable cause, therefore the warrant was invalid. According to the defendant, the warrant did not even establish probable cause to believe he stored a computer at