YOUNGSTOWN Lawyer: Porn evidence was illegally seized

The Lowellville man will be sentenced next week on other sex-related charges.
By BOB JACKSON
VINDICATOR COURTHOUSE REPORTER
YOUNGSTOWN -- Jurors should not be allowed to see pornographic pictures that were taken from Anthony Panici's home computer because they were illegally seized by authorities.
That's what Panici's lawyer, Dennis DiMartino, says in documents filed this week in Mahoning County Common Pleas Court, where Panici is awaiting trial on six counts of pandering obscenity involving a minor.
Panici, 35, of West Wood Street, Lowellville, is a former head football coach and teacher at Lowellville High School. He pleaded guilty in August to five counts of gross sexual imposition. He is to be sentenced on those charges next week by Judge Maureen A. Cronin.
Panici admitted having sexual relations in June 1999 with a 14-year-old girl who attended Lowellville High but was not one of his students. The girl admitted the sexual activity to a teacher, who notified authorities.
A county grand jury indicted Panici in December 2000 on five counts of sexual battery, which were reduced to gross sexual imposition as part of a plea agreement.
Computer seized
DiMartino said part of the investigation into those charges included seizure of Panici's home computer, where authorities hoped to find e-mail messages that would confirm the illegal sexual relationship.
No such messages were found, but authorities did find "file formats which depict children in graphic nude poses and/or acts of sexual misconduct or sexual contact," court documents say.
As a result, authorities requested a second search warrant to include computer data stored on the hard drive of Panici's computer. That search turned up several pictures of children who were nude or involved in sexual acts, authorities said.
None of the pornography involved the girl with whom Panici had sex, and he is not accused of sharing the images with anyone. Under Ohio law, it is illegal to download such images onto a computer hard drive for storage.
Based on those pictures, Panici was indicted again in March 2002 on the pandering charges.
DiMartino said that if not for the searches in the first case, police would not have found the photographs that led to the second set of charges. He has filed a motion to suppress prosecutors from using the photographs at trial.
He argues that the search that led to the discovery of the pictures was illegal because authorities did not show probable cause to justify a search warrant and that the police affidavit on which the warrant was based was too vague.
DiMartino also says the search was "totally invasive," which is a violation of Panici's constitutional rights.
bjackson@vindy.com