United States v. Jackson

── United States v. Jackson ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit Date: April 16, 2026 Category: General Appellate Case: 24-1341 Document: 59-1 Date Filed: 04/16/2026 Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS April 16, 2026 FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT _________________________________ Christopher M. Wolpert Clerk of Court UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. No. 24-1341 (D.C. No. 1:23-CR-00321-GPG-JMC-1) KALUB SEAN JACKSON, (D. Colo.) Defendant - Appellant. _________________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT * _________________________________ Before ROSSMAN, MURPHY, and FEDERICO, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ On a brisk February morning, police officers assembled near Kalub Jackson’s residence to search him and his property pursuant to a search warrant. But as they huddled little more than a mile away from Jackson’s home, Jackson himself drove by them on his way to work. The officers scrambled to stop Jackson, and once he was pulled over, engaged him in an interaction that resulted in the officers’ obtaining access to his phone, where * This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 32.1 and Tenth Circuit Rule 32.1.  Appellate Case: 24-1341 Document: 59-1 Date Filed: 04/16/2026 Page: 2 the sole source of incriminating evidence was to be found. Jackson appeals the district court’s decision to deny suppression of this evidence. But Jackson fails to establish that officers violated the Fourth Amendment when seizing his phone so, exercising jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we affirm. I Before addressing the merits, we first set the scene for the investigation that led to Jackson’s criminal conviction. We then address the procedural history of this case. We also carefully review the arguments that were made in district court, since they shed greater light on the issues raised on appeal. A Sometime in November 2022 and January 2023, Detective Josh Newman 1 received cyber-tips from the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children about child pornography contained on a Dropbox account. The Dropbox account username identified Jackson as the user, and the account was associated with an email address that contained Jackson’s name. The Dropbox account was also associated with an IP address linked 1 Detective Newman is a Colorado police officer who is also a federal task force officer. 2  Appellate Case: 24-1341 Document: 59-1 Date Filed: 04/16/2026 Page: 3 to a business in Durango, Colorado. That business, in turn, was linked to a residence in nearby Hesperus, Colorado. Detective Newman confirmed that Jackson lived at this residence through drone surveillance, database checks, and the U.S. Postal Service. With these facts in hand, Detective Newman believed that he had probable cause that Jackson was in violation of 18 U.S.C §§ 2252A(a)(5)(B) and (b)(2), which criminalize possession of child pornography, and that evidence of Jackson’s crime would be found on his electronic devi