Hearing set on motion to suppress evidence in trafficking case

A hearing is scheduled for July 1 on a motion filed by the attorney for a Rhinelander man charged with trafficking of a child and possession of child pornography.
In an eight-page motion, public defender attorney Breanna Magallones argues Oneida County officers went “beyond the scope” of their search warrant when they accessed data from electronic devices belonging to convicted sex offender Albert J. Chagnon and, as a result, the evidence obtained should be suppressed.
Chagnon, 43, is charged with one count of trafficking of a child, 13 counts of possession of child pornography and one count of failure to update sex offender information, according to criminal complaints filed in January and October 2024.
In the motion, Magallones argues the sheriff’s department’s search of Chagnon’s electronic devices is comparable to actions taken by Dunn County investigators in 2019 while investigating a case involving allegations of possession of child pornography.
In 2023, the Wisconsin Supreme Court held that the Dunn County investigators did not have legal authority to access the data contained in the child pornography suspect’s cellphone. The lawfully obtained search warrant authorized them to seize the device in question but did not authorize access to its data, the court found. In that case, the defendant filed a pretrial motion to suppress the evidence in question but the presiding judge denied the request.
The high court ruled the trial judge erred in denying the motion and overturned the man’s convictions.
In her motion, Magallones stresses that the 4th Amendment requires investigators seeking search warrants to be specific in describing both the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.
“This protection keeps the state from ‘engaging in general exploratory rummaging through a person’s papers and effects in search of anything that might prove incriminating,’” she wrote. Later in the motion, she argues that modern cellphones contain “multitudes of data” which if allowed to search without a warrant, would be analogous to rummaging at will among a person’s private property.
“A premises warrant does not inherently authorize police the ability to search a cellphone even if it was seized as part of the warrant,” Magallones wrote, adding that “the objects of the search are different from the data stored within those objects. Cellphones are not containers in which law enforcement can search pursuant to a premises warrant.”
Magallones summarized the defense’s assertions as follows:
1) Chagnon had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the electronics officers searched, such that the deputies needed either a valid search warrant or a valid exception to the warrant requirement in order to search the electronics; II) The officers went beyond the scope of the original warrant and illegally searched the electronics; III) That as a result of the illegal search, the officers obtained two additional search warrants and additional evidence was located and that the evidence obtained from the subsequent search warrants should be suppressed as a result of the fruit of the poisonous tree; and IV) No exigent circumstances existed at the time of the search that would have permitted the officers to search the electronics prior to a warrant being issued.”
“Fruit of the poisonous tree” refers to the legal principle that evidence obtained via unlawful methods is inadmissible as is any subsequent evidence derived from the tainted evidence.
Chagnon returned to Rhinelander in the fall of 2022 after completing a sentence for violating prison rules during his incarceration on previous possession of child pornography charges. At the time of his return to Oneida County, he was under the supervision of the Department of Corrections, however his term of supervision was set to expire in September 2023.
Further, as of Jan. 8, 2025, he would no longer have to register as a sex offender.
According to court records, the Oneida County district attorney’s office filed four separate criminal complaints against Chagnon in 2024. The cases were filed in January, June, August and October. The July 1 motion hearing pertains only to the first and fourth cases. The charges filed in June and August 2024 are felony bail jumping, failure to update sex offender information and encouraging a probation violation.
Chagnon’s criminal history includes convictions for possession of child pornography in 2003, failure to maintain sex offender registry in 2010, failure to update sex offender information in 2013, violating state/county institution laws in 2014 and battery in 2018.
The 2014 case involved Chagnon clipping hundreds of photos of young girls and keeping them in a notebook while he was an inmate at the Oshkosh Correctional Institution.
According to court records, as Chagnon was being processed for discharge from prison, officials found a notebook containing photographs of fully clothed girls that he had clipped from a local newspaper. Some of the photos were accompanied by written commentary of a graphic nature.
Following discovery of the notebook, Chagnon was charged with 23 felony counts of intentionally photographing a minor without consent and four counts of violating state/county institution laws. However, an appeals court later ordered the dismissal of the felony counts, agreeing with Chagnon’s appellate attorney that those counts fell under the statute that prohibits sex offenders from “intentionally capturing a representation” of a minor without the written consent of the child’s parent, legal guardian or custodian.
Chagnon’s attorney successfully argued that “intentionally capturing a representation” means Chagnon would have had to have produced the photos himself using a camera or recording device.
Following the appeals court ruling, Chagnon entered no contest pleas to three misdemeanor counts of violating state/county institution laws (as a repeater). The fourth count was read in for sentencing purposes. A Winnebago County judge sentenced him to one year in prison followed by one year of extended supervision, to be served consecutively, with credit for 394 days served. He completed that sentence in the fall of 2022.
Chagnon, who remains in custody in the Oneida County jail, was last in court in late May at which time Judge Mike Schiek noted the defense had filed a motion to suppress.
A hearing on the motion was set for June 25 and later rescheduled to July 1.
The district attorney’s office has not filed a written response to the motion.