ThePerrinecase illustrates how law enforcement must utilizethe statutory framework to trace the source of criminal activityand then operate within the Fourth Amendment framework toseize evidence on the digital device that was the source of theactivity. Some aspects of an investigation do not implicate anyregulatory regime and law enforcement may, just like any privatecitizen, utilize the numerous ways that the Internet now offers tolearn something to facilitate the investigation. Hence, aninvestigator passes in and out of three frameworks to obtaindigital evidence: 1) statutes; 2) the Fourth Amendment; and, 3) non-regulatedcyber-space. The point here is not togain an understanding of the doctrines but to understand the complexity ofsuch investigations, including passing in and out of various legalregimes during the course of the investigation. Picture yourself as the investigator in this case.

Question 1: What evidence of crime is there? (recount thefacts of the case).

Question 2: Who is the criminal; how do the police find him?

Question 3: What do you do next? (Discuss the various legal regimes that the police must confront and how they must comply with those regimes. For example, search engines such as Google, public websites, and chat rooms offer a host of information to anyone who chooses to use them. Perhaps you could use a free IP locater service and enter the IP address inPerrineto show howeasy it is to find who is assigned the IP address. Discuss all the steps you would take until you have seized Vanlandingham's computer and why each step is important.