The lawyers are aimed at evidence in the case of the deputy’s child sexual abuse material – Inforum

Fargo – A Richland County judge will decide whether the evidence collected during the house of a former deputy of the CASS County Sheriff can be used against him in the Court after state prosecutors and a defense lawyer faced for the legality of the search during a hearing on Tuesday morning.

The North Dakota Supreme Court assigned to the Southeast District Judge Daniel Narum to preside over the case of serious crime against Carson Quam. All the Judges of the Central District were challenged due to a possible conflict as a result of the former employment of QUAM as Patrol deputy with the Cass County Sheriff’s office. Similarly, the prosecutors of the office of the state of the state of Grand Forks County are judging the case instead of the office of the state of the state of CASS County.

Quam, 26, from Mchenry, northern Dakota,

He resigned from the Sheriff’s office

In September, the day, the agents of the Northern Dakota Criminal Investigation Office interrogated and searched at home evidence that Quam was in possession of child sexual abuse materials. In December, he was

accused of ten declines of serious crimes

to have prohibited materials.

ANNA PAIGE / THE FORUM

At the end of January, Quam’s lawyer, Mark Friese,

presented a motion to suppress the evidence in the case,

who met during the search for his client’s house on the day of his resignation. In the Court on Tuesday, Friese said that the investigators relied on “bold and no support accusations” that were “obsolete and vague” to present their case in the order of order.

“The statement (in the affidavit of the search warrant) was that Mr. Quam had seen pornography. There were no indications of when, it could have been a year, it could have been a decade ago. There is no identification of how many times, or where, if it was at work, vacation, at home, no indication of what is only a child pornography … there is zero connection between this dispute over the rape of seeing porn Quame

Friese said that the investigators were working with an accusation of “fourth hand” in the case and, in testimony during the hearing on Tuesday, agent Daniel Heidbreder, of the State Office of Criminal Investigation, acknowledged that the case had reached the BCI in a somewhat “abnormal” way.

ANNA PAIGE / THE FORUM

The judicial documents show that a Fargo police officer reported that his ex -wife had received information from a woman who was dating Kayla Quam, Carson Quam’s wife, saying that Kayla Quam had caught Carson Quam when seeing material of child sexual abuse, and that Carson had threatened if Kayla did inform the law of the law.

The researchers tracked the woman who was the initial source of the tip, but she refused to talk to them. Then they questioned Carson and Kayla Quam separately in the Sheriff’s office, where both were employed at that time.

Kayla Quam told researchers that he was aware that Carson Quam looked pornography on his cell phone broadcast by work, but that it was only adult pornography, and that the cell phone broadcast by work was the only device he used.

Then, the researchers interviewed Carson Quam, who admitted to having sought pornography that involved teenage girls in their cell phone broadcast by work and watching links from websites that included child sexual abuse that involves 15 and 16 year old girls. He also said that he saw videos involving teenagers on a television enabled for the Internet at home, but did not remember “if they were naked or participated in sexual acts.”

He told the researchers that he had downloaded a browser that allows anonymous searches to hide his searches for his wife, but a forensic review of his labor telephone did not present any evidence that the browser has been downloaded on him, according to prosecutors.

Both quams referred to a broken personal cell phone that Carson Quam had used at the same time, but none admitted to know what had been of the phone.

Heidbreder said that it was the “totality” of these circumstances and accounts that he believed that researchers gave a probable cause to present and execute a search warrant of Casselton’s house in Quams.

Judge John Irby signed the order and the BCI agents registered the house on the same day. There, eight electronic devices confiscated, including the broken phone. It was on that phone, said Heidbreder, that the child sexual abuse material was found later.

Friese said that a “link” was missing or connection between the evidence that was sought and the house that was recorded. The state assistant prosecutor, Justine Hesselbart, argued that the Supreme Court of the State previously ruled that an affidavit “(registration) does not need to establish certainty, since the mere probability will be sufficient” when establishing a probable cause of a raid order, and that the fourth amendment “does not require a trace of unexpected evidence”, in doing so.

“It is clear that there was certainly a probable cause for this search warrant not only to execute but also a judge … many evidence has been established, not only in the investigation investigation and a portion of probable cause within the search war Search in the search for the search in the search for search in the search for search, and was detected and was detected the search for the search, and realized the search for the search, and the investigations, which went to the search, what was sought in the search, and realized the search and was the guarantee of the search, and realized the search and it was the search for the search, and realized the search, and the search was Search for search, and what was the case, which went to search. It was the source of the main evidence in the case.

In his argument, Friese also cited a prior finding of the Supreme Court of the State that invalidated an affidavit of the search order based on the information that was only “dim and conclusive”, which said he described perfectly the sworn statement in the search for Quam.

ANNA PAIGE / THE FORUM

“The fourth amendment was ratified in 1791, and for almost 234 years our country has been based on the proposal that a man’s house is his castle. Almost all the reason why the fourth amendment was adopted was to stop what happened here: a general exploratory search for a man’s house without sufficient evidence to connect that house with the alleged criminal activity,” said Friese.

Narum said he would issue a written opinion about the defense motion to suppress evidence, but did not give a timeline. No future audiences were scheduled in the case from Tuesday afternoon.