## Facts

- Police investigated homicides and an aggravated assault connected to a family dispute over real property.
- Officers obtained a warrant to seize and examine John Hinds’s computer for electronic mail and other documents related to the dispute.
- While executing the warrant, officers found John Hinds’s computer connected by a network cable to a hub linked to computers at a nearby residence, including Charles Hinds, Jr.’s computer.
- Officers went to the nearby residence and obtained access from a family member.
- Charles Hinds, Jr. consented to a search of his computer limited to electronic mail potentially relevant to the property dispute and homicide investigation.
- While searching for e-mail, an officer opened directories and files and encountered images that appeared to be child pornography.
- The officer stopped the consent search, seized the computer, and later obtained a warrant to search its contents.
- A forensic search conducted under the warrant revealed thousands of images of child pornography on Hinds’s computer, leading to seven indictments for unlawful possession of child pornography under G.L. c. 272, § 29C.
- The trial judge denied Hinds’s motion to suppress; after a jury-waived trial, he was convicted on all indictments.

## Issues

1. Whether a consent search of a computer for e-mail permitted officers to open directories and files, and whether seizure of the computer and a later warrant-based search were lawful after discovering apparent contraband.
2. Whether the evidence was sufficient to prove that the defendant knowingly possessed child pornography, despite a shared home network and potential access by others.

## Decision

- The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts affirmed the convictions.
- The court held the file-and-directory review was within the scope of consent to search for e-mail because accessing e-mail reasonably requires opening directories and files where such data may be stored.
- The court held that once the officer encountered apparent child pornography during the lawful consent search, the images were in plain view, permitting seizure of the computer and a later comprehensive search under a warrant.
- The court held the evidence was sufficient to prove possession because a factfinder could infer the defendant’s knowledge and control from the quantity and storage of images on his computer, notwithstanding the existence of a shared network.

## Legal Principles

- The scope of a consent search is measured by objective reasonableness: what a typical reasonable person would understand from the exchange between the police and the consenting individual.
- Consent to search a computer for a defined category of information (such as e-mail) may permit opening directories and files where the target information could reasonably be found.
- Under the plain view doctrine, contraband discovered during a lawful, properly limited search may be seized, and police may then obtain a warrant for a broader forensic examination.
- Possession of digital contraband may be proved by circumstantial evidence showing knowing dominion and control over the device and stored data, even if others had potential access.

## Conclusion

The court upheld the denial of suppression and affirmed convictions for possession of child pornography, ruling that consent to search for e-mail reasonably included opening computer files and directories, that contraband images discovered in plain view justified seizure and a warrant search, and that circumstantial evidence supported the defendant’s knowing possession despite a shared network.


Commonwealth v. Hinds, 437 Mass. 54, 768 N.E.2d 1067 (Mass. 2002)