Category Archives: Particularity

D.Minn.: Nine state CSLI warrants were issued with PC and were particular

Nine state search warrants were issued for CSLI to attempt to solve nine pharmacy robberies in March-June 2018. Aside from potential standing on questions on some warrants, the search warrants were issued with probable cause and they were particular. Finally, … Continue reading

Posted in Cell site location information, Particularity | Comments Off on D.Minn.: Nine state CSLI warrants were issued with PC and were particular

NE: For Rodriguez purposes, it doesn’t matter that the stop was at a gas station and not on the side of the road

Defendant’s reasonable detention pre-dog sniff was at a gas station and not on the side of the road. That doesn’t change the constitutional calculus. State v. Ferguson, 301 Neb. 697 (Nov. 30, 2018). “Here, the Court finds the warrant described … Continue reading

Posted in Dog sniff, Particularity, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on NE: For Rodriguez purposes, it doesn’t matter that the stop was at a gas station and not on the side of the road

DE: Lack of temporal limitation in data search only results in suppression of the excess, not all

The search warrant for information was based on probable cause, but it lacked a temporal limitation. That, however, doesn’t lead to suppression of the whole; just suppression of that which was obtained that predates the probable cause. State v. Anderson, … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Particularity | Comments Off on DE: Lack of temporal limitation in data search only results in suppression of the excess, not all

S.D.N.Y.: Emails from CIs provided PC, and the SW was limited to categories of information

A CI gave emails to government investigators about health care fraud. They and other information provided probable cause for more emails. The warrants were particularized by being limited to eight categories. United States v. Mathieu, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 192281 … Continue reading

Posted in E-mail, Informant hearsay, Particularity, Probable cause | Comments Off on S.D.N.Y.: Emails from CIs provided PC, and the SW was limited to categories of information

S.D.Ohio: Warrant was still particular because attachments were present at time of search

The search warrants here were particular because the affidavits and attachments were incorporated by reference and present at the time of the search. The temporal limitations on the warrant were not vague and stale. It was limited in scope otherwise. … Continue reading

Posted in Particularity, Staleness, Standing | Comments Off on S.D.Ohio: Warrant was still particular because attachments were present at time of search

ME: Describing stolen tools by color and make was certainly particular as it could get

Stolen tools were described in the search warrant by color and make, and this was not unconstitutionally vague in the description just because other brands might have the same color scheme. “In this case, the search warrants identified the items … Continue reading

Posted in Particularity, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on ME: Describing stolen tools by color and make was certainly particular as it could get

N.D.W.Va.: SW lacked PC and was not particular: “his search warrant is among the broadest and most general warrants that have been reviewed by” this judge

The search warrant for defendant’s computer was essentially based on a hunch that it contained evidence in a homicide case, but the affidavit fails to state what. In a lengthy analysis, the court finds the computer warrant lacking in probable … Continue reading

Posted in Computer searches, Particularity, Probable cause | Comments Off on N.D.W.Va.: SW lacked PC and was not particular: “his search warrant is among the broadest and most general warrants that have been reviewed by” this judge

M.D.La.: Typo in the address of the place to be searched not fatal where officers surveilled it before

There was an error in the address on the search warrant, but it’s clear to the court that there was no likelihood that the wrong apartment would be searched because the officers had surveilled it. There was reasonable suspicion for … Continue reading

Posted in Particularity, Staleness | Comments Off on M.D.La.: Typo in the address of the place to be searched not fatal where officers surveilled it before

LA4: Actual apartment number not needed in SW when it is clearly described

The actual apartment number on the search warrant isn’t required when defendant’s apartment is clearly described. (“2819 Carondelet Street, New Orleans, La., described as the middle first floor apartment of a raised two story wood frame structure with grey stucco … Continue reading

Posted in Particularity | Comments Off on LA4: Actual apartment number not needed in SW when it is clearly described

D.Colo.: There is no requirement the SW particularly describe the inside of the place to be searched

The CI was corroborated by controlled buys and surveillance cameras showing drug deals outside defendant’s home. The house was sufficiently described that the wrong house wouldn’t be searched. “Ms. Pereda nonetheless argues the search warrant lacked particularity because it did … Continue reading

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Particularity | Comments Off on D.Colo.: There is no requirement the SW particularly describe the inside of the place to be searched

KY: SW not invalid because the color of door was wrong; finding gun during search for drugs not unreasonable

“Appellant specifically argues that the warrant was defective because it incorrectly described the front door to his residence as black when, in fact, the door was brown. Appellant’s first name was also misspelled in the warrant. However, neither of these … Continue reading

Posted in Particularity, Plain view, feel, smell, Warrant execution | Comments Off on KY: SW not invalid because the color of door was wrong; finding gun during search for drugs not unreasonable

CA7: Searching wrong apt on ambiguous SW (apt 1 where there were 1A & 1B) gets qualified immunity here

When the officer arrived at plaintiff’s address with a search warrant for apartment 1, he instead found apartments 1A and 1B. The officers attempted to clear up the ambiguity before the search, and they searched 1A finding nothing, and the … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Particularity, Qualified immunity, Warrant execution | Comments Off on CA7: Searching wrong apt on ambiguous SW (apt 1 where there were 1A & 1B) gets qualified immunity here