Defendant Jessie Glass Jr. contended that a detective failed to include in a search warrant affidavit details about his accuser — Glass' estranged wife — that would have eroded her credibility. The three-judge panel, however, said that the omitted information was immaterial to a state court judge's finding that there was probable cause to search Glass' devices.
"Glass failed his burden, a rigorous one by good design, to suppress the evidence seized," U.S. Circuit Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III wrote for the panel.
In 2019, Glass' wife, April Glass, told police she saw him looking at child sexual abuse materials, or CSAM, and a sheriff's detective obtained a search warrant for his devices. Authorities found 72 images involving sexually exploited children, as well as saved links for a website containing videos of exploited children.
A grand jury in August 2021 indicted Jessie Glass on one count of possession of CSAM and three counts of receipt of CSAM.
Jessie Glass sought to suppress the evidence. He argued that the detective failed to mention that April Glass was his estranged wife, and that she had twice before accused him of possessing CSAM, in 2016 and 2017, but her claims were deemed unfounded. The district court denied his motion.
A jury convicted him on all four counts in 2023, and a judge last year sentenced him to 15 years in prison, lifetime supervised release, a $5,000 special assessment for certain CSAM-related crimes and $6,000 in restitution.
He appealed based on the denial of his suppression motion, and also claimed that the three counts of receiving CSAM violated the double jeopardy clause. He challenged the $5,000 special assessment against him as well.
But on Tuesday the Fourth Circuit rejected his arguments, saying each receipt count was based on downloads of different files at different times, and that the special assessment was warranted and reasonable.
"The past reports against Glass for similar offenses, as well as April's specific allegations against him (made face-to-face with an officer, no less), sufficed to generate a 'practical, nontechnical probability' that the warrants would yield incriminating evidence — even when knowing the history about April that Glass emphasizes here," the opinion said.
Representatives for the parties did not immediately respond to requests for comment late Tuesday.
U.S. Circuit Judges J. Harvie Wilkinson III, Roger Gregory and Nicole Berner sat on the panel for the Fourth Circuit.
Glass is represented by Melissa Baldwin and John Baker of the Office of the Federal Public Defender.
The government is represented by Amy Ray and Dena King of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Western District of North Carolina.
The case is U.S. v. Jessie Glass Jr., case number 24-4193, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
--Editing by Melissa Treolo.
For a reprint of this article, please contact reprints@law360.com.
