United States of America v. Jose Alejandro Belmonte Cardozo

Alexandria, Virginia, criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with sexual exploitation of a child in violation of 18 U.S.C. 2251(a).

Border searches do not require a warrant to be reasonable. And if a border search is
routine, individualized suspicion is not required either. But law enforcement may not
conduct a nonroutine border search without individualized suspicion. Under our precedent, forensic searches of cell phones are nonroutine. But what about manual searches? Today, we join all our sister circuits that have addressed this issue in holding that manual searches of cell phones at the border are routine and thus do not require individualized suspicion.

On May 8, 2024, Jose Belmonte Cardozo traveled from Bolivia to the United States
and landed at Washington Dulles International Airport. Though he didn’t know it at the time, U.S. Customs and Border Protection Port Intelligence Officer Sara Oliphant was waiting for him.

When Belmonte Cardozo landed and presented himself for customs inspection, he
produced two iPhones. Officer Oliphant asked Belmonte Cardozo to unlock the phones, and he complied.1 She then opened the phones’ photo galleries and toggled to their hidden galleries.2 There, she found sexually explicit photos and videos of prepubescent girls. In 1 Belmonte Cardozo mentions in his opening brief that there’s an open question over whether compelling a defendant to provide his passcode violates the Fifth Amendment. In his reply brief, he clarifies he isn’t pursuing a Fifth Amendment claim. So, we decline to address the question.

Later, the arresting agent filed a criminal complaint in the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, accusing Belmonte Cardozo of transporting child pornography. Eventually, a federal grand jury in that district indicted Belmonte Cardozo on five counts of sexual exploitation of a child in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2251(a) and (e), two counts of coercion and enticement of a minor to engage in illegal sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b), one count of transportation of child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(1) and (b)(1), one count of receipt of child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(2) and (b)(1) and one count of possession of child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(4)(B) and (b)(2)

THE DEFENDANT WAS FOUND GUILTY AND WAS SENTENCED TO 18 YEARS BOP THIS CONSISTS OF 18 YEARS AS TO EACH OF COUNTS 1-10 TO RUN CONCURRENTLY WITH EACH OTHER, 25 YEAR SR TERM W/ CONDITIONS THIS CONSISTS OF 25 YEARS AS TO EACH OF COUNTS 1-10 TO RUN CONCURRENTLY WITH EACH OTHER; $1,000 SA; $6,900 RESTITUTION.