A federal magistrate judge in Florida has rejected a motion to suppress electronic evidence in a criminal case against Gal Vallerius, a French national who entered the United States to attend a beard contest last year and is accused of being a moderator on a “dark web” drug marketplace.

The decision by U.S. Magistrate Judge Edwin Torres of the Southern District of Florida on Tuesday reaffirms previous decisions holding that entrants to the United States can be subjected to questioning and broad searches of their belongings prior to clearing customs.

Attorneys representing Vallerius at the Federal Public Defender's Office in Miami argued that entrants can assert rights under the Fourth and Fifth amendments to limit what evidence authorities can obtain from a suspect's electronic devices at the border.

Vallerius—who wears a long, bushy beard—was detained after deplaning in Atlanta last year. Federal authorities in Florida were investigating online drug transactions and suspected Vallerius was a moderator going by the moniker “OxyMonster” on a dark web marketplace called Dream Market.

According to court documents, investigators identified Vallerius as OxyMonster by tracing bitcoin transactions made through Dream Market and comparing his writing style on the forum with postings made on his personal social media accounts.

When he arrived in the U.S., a federal agent pulled Vallerius aside for questioning and asked him to unlock several devices: a laptop, smartphone and an iPad tablet. Vallerius was told it was part of a routine inspection for child pornography and other potential contraband.

Vallerius complied, and the devices were taken to a room for inspection, according to court documents.

His attorneys moved to suppress the evidence on the grounds that Vallerius had been taken into custody and questioned without being read his Miranda rights, and thus any incriminating evidence was obtained in violation of the Fifth Amendment. They also argued that authorities required Vallerius' consent to search his devices without a warrant under the Fourth Amendment, and that authorities had essentially tricked Vallerius into unlocking his devices by telling him the search was a routine inspection.

Torres, however, rejected both of those arguments in an order recommending that the motion to suppress be denied. He ruled that Vallerius was not “in custody” for the purposes of Miranda protections, because of the government's broad authority to question people seeking entry to the U.S. at the border.

Torres also rebuffed the notion that agents required consent at all in order to inspect Vallerius' devices, because of the government's broad search authority at the border. Agents “possessed independent authority to search the electronic devices for evidence of criminal activity or contraband as a result of the border search doctrine, and therefore consent is immaterial,” Torres said. At the same time, the magistrate also found that Vallerius' consent “was knowing and voluntary.”

Vallerius is now being held in jail in south Florida pending trial, and has been indicted on narcotics trafficking-related charges. His lead attorney at the Federal Public Defender's Office, Anthony Natale, said via phone on Wednesday that he had not yet consulted with his client about the decision, but would likely file an objection.

Juan Antonio Gonzalez, deputy chief of the international narcotics and money laundering section of the U.S. Attorney's Office in Miami, declined to comment.