Cothren fights search warrant in phone seizure, ‘cyberstalking’ case
Federal agents raided the homes and seized the phones of three vocal critics of House Speaker Cameron Sexton in connection with a “cyberstalking” investigation, documents show.
The search warrant targeted Cade Cothren, former chief of staff to former House Speaker Glen Casada, both of whom are set to go on trial in March on federal corruption charges. A judge handling the case ordered U.S. prosecutors Friday to explain the seizure. Cothren’s filing claims federal agents raided his Nashville home shortly before 6 a.m. Tuesday and took four cellphones, using a search warrant in connection with a “cyberstalking” investigation.
The warrant also targeted Brian Manookian of Brentwood in Williamson County and Larry Grimes, according to documents. Manookian has been highly critical of House Speaker Cameron Sexton in online posts, accusing him of living in Nashville instead of Crossville where he claims to live and targeting his personal life. Grimes is a former Republican Executive Committee member believed to manage a social media account critical of Sexton.
Sexton has been cooperating with federal agents in their investigation of Cothren in a Capitol Hill corruption probe.
Cothren contends the search warrant served on him and others is “overbroad and constitutionally invalid,” claiming it is “limitless in scope” and allows the governor “to search within every nook and cranny” of his cellphone for evidence related to a “cyberstalking” investigation and more.
Cothren filed a motion with U.S. District Court Judge Eli Richardson to quash a search warrant and requested an immediate protective order prohibiting the processing or review of materials.
U.S. attorneys said in a court document filed Thursday the phones taken from Cothren and other individuals in raids early Tuesday could provide evidence in a corruption probe of Casada and Cothren and sought to postpone their March trial.
Richardson ordered government attorneys to provide a response by the end of Friday to address the “emergency nature” of Cothren’s motion as well as the judge’s authority to quash a search warrant issued by another judicial official “in relation to a separate investigation into potential crimes not alleged in an indictment” before him.
A document filed by U.S. attorneys seeking to postpone the trial does not include the search warrant showing who signed off on it.
Cothren was indicted in August 2022 for federal program theft, bribery and kickbacks dealing with a federal program, honest services wire fraud, using a fictitious name to carry out fraud and money laundering. Federal prosecutors say former Rep. Robin Smith, R-Hixson, and Casada steered House members to use Phoenix Solutions, a vendor secretly run by Cothren, to do constituent mailer work in return for kickbacks. Smith pleaded guilty and is supposed to testify against Casada and Cothren at a trial set for March 5.
In his court move, Cothren called the search warrant “overbroad,” saying under the Fourth Amendment, the warrant must state the items to be searched and seized based on “probable cause.”
“The government’s 2024 search warrant, however, allows the government unfettered access to Mr. Cothren’s entire cellular telephone, which contains his email accounts, social media accounts, text messages and a host of other private and sensitive material, including but not related to, privileged materials and work product relating to Mr. Cothren’s pending criminal case,” the filing states.
Cothren, who is represented by Cynthia Sherwood and Joy Boyd Longnecker, contends the search warrant has “at least three incurable defects,” including seeking materials protected by attorney-client privilege and the work product doctrine. That includes communications with private investigator Michael Donaldson, who worked with his defense team.
The filing claims Cothren has more than three years’ worth of privileged and confidential attorney-client communications and work product on his phone. In addition, he argues the search warrant allows the government to go through evidence related to his pending criminal case “without requiring the government to demonstrate probable cause for obtaining this evidence.”