that the search was constitutional because the delay did not cause a lapse in probable cause, did not unfairly prejudice the defendant, and was not done in bad faith. Id., at 714. We find this reasoning to be persuasive. The record demonstrates that the search warrant for Wolfs computer was obtained on August 20, 2007. The return of search warrant was filed on August 21, 2007, and provided a list of all the items seized from Wolfs residence, including his computer. A report dated October 27, 2007, detailed the information obtained from Wolfs computer after a forensic examination was performed. As demonstrated by the return on the search warrant, the search of Wolfs residence and seizure of his computer was completed within fourteen days of the issuance of the search warran t Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Hernandez, 183 F.Supp.2d
holding a fivemonth delay in searching a computer did not invalidate the search because there was no showing that the delay caused a lapse in probable cause that it created prejudice to the defendant or that officers acted in bad faith recognizing that a fivemonth delay weighs against the defendant holding that a fivemonth delay in filing a motion to disqualify did not bar the motion where there was a reasonable explanation for the delay holding the search of a computer after the warrant had expired constitutional because despite the delay probable cause for the search continued to exist holding a month delay in search of a computer constitutional because probable cause continued to exist at the time of the search and no prejudice occurred