The Eleventh Circuit has held that a defendant is not entitled to the exclusion of evidence that was seized and searched by foreign government officials before being reviewed by U.S. prosecutors and introduced in a U.S. proceeding.  In United States v. Odoni, No. 13-13528 (11th Cir. Jan. 13, 2015), the defendant was convicted of participating in an international investment fraud scheme.  The scheme was the subject of an investigation by the United Kingdom’s Serious Fraud Office (SFO), which found the defendant’s name while reviewing documents found in Barcelona by a Spanish task force.  The defendant was then arrested at Gatwick Airport in England.  Upon his arrest, the police seized a laptop computer, a thumb drive, and other materials.  Data recovered from these items was reviewed by the SFO and was also provided to federal agents in the U.S.  At trial, the defendant moved to suppress the data.  He did not challenge the seizure of his belongings by British authorities, as the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule does not apply to searches and seizure conducted by foreign officials on foreign soil, but he challenged the search of his data by U.S. officials.  Citing United States v. Jacobsen, 466 U.S. 109 (1984), the court noted that an individual does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in an object to the extent that the object has already been searched by a private party.  The Eleventh Circuit found that the same principle applies to searches initially conducted by foreign government officials; “in both cases, an entity other than a U.S. state or federal agent or official has already examined the object and its contents and therefore eliminated the individual’s reasonable expectation of privacy in the contents.”  Accordingly, the court affirmed the denial of the defendant’s motion to suppress.