Skip to main content


Reset A A Font size: Print

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Tommy R. FINDLEY, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 18-14204

Decided: May 22, 2020

Before WILSON, MARCUS, and BUSH,* Circuit Judges, Robert Benjamin Cornell, Phillip Drew DiRosa, U.S. Attorney's Office, Fort Lauderdale, FL, Kathryn Dalzell, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney's Office, Miami, FL, Andrea G. Hoffman, Emily M. Smachetti, U.S. Attorney Service - Southern District of Florida, U.S. Attorney Service - SFL, Miami, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellee Michael Caruso, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender's Office, West Palm Beach, FL, Tracy Michele Dreispul, Federal Public Defender's Office, Miami, FL, for Defendant-Appellant

Tommy R. Findley appeals his convictions and sentences for production of child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2251(a) and (e), and possession of child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(4)(B) and (b)(2). On appeal, Findley argues that the district court (1) failed to clearly indicate that it conducted a de novo review of the suppression-hearing evidence before denying his motion to suppress; (2) improperly denied his motion to suppress; (3) constructively amended both counts of the indictment; (4) imposed an unreasonable sentence; and (5) erred by restricting his use of a computer with a modem as a condition of supervised release.

After considering the parties’ briefs, the record on appeal, and with the benefit of oral argument, we find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm Findley’s convictions and sentences.



Copied to clipboard