Category Archives: Overbreadth

D.Mass.: “All records” relating to wire fraud was particular enough

“The warrant here, and, specifically, the attachment describing the items to be seized, satisfied the Fourth Amendment’s particularity requirement. Kerrissey argues, first, that the attachment was overbroad because it authorized the seizure of ‘“all records, in whatever form” for multiple … Continue reading

Posted in Overbreadth, Particularity, Probable cause | Comments Off on D.Mass.: “All records” relating to wire fraud was particular enough

E.D.Mich.: No REP in a contraband cell phone in prison

There is no standing in a contraband cell phone in prison. United States v. Pouncy, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 202490 (E.D. Mich. Oct. 14, 2025). The trial court properly limited the time frame of this warrant when an overbreadth challenge … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Emergency / exigency, Overbreadth, Prison and jail searches, Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on E.D.Mich.: No REP in a contraband cell phone in prison

E.D.Ky.: If cell phone warrant is overbroad, remedy is to suppress the overbroad part, not all

“Assuming, without deciding, that the Cellphone Warrant was overbroad due to lack of a timeframe limitation, this finding would not mean that all evidence seized under the cellphone warrant is subject to suppression. The proper remedy is to suppress only … Continue reading

Posted in Overbreadth, Particularity, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on E.D.Ky.: If cell phone warrant is overbroad, remedy is to suppress the overbroad part, not all

CT: “All data” warrant was unreasonable, but harmless on all the facts

The warrant for “all data” on defendant’s cell phone violated the Fourth Amendment’s particularity requirement, even though it was limited to two weeks before the murder. Yet, the state’s case was so strong, the cell phone data was harmless beyond … Continue reading

Posted in Overbreadth, Probable cause | Comments Off on CT: “All data” warrant was unreasonable, but harmless on all the facts

OR: CP warrant was overbroad

The warrant for defendant’s computer was overbroad in seeking alleged child pornography of others than the known alleged victims, essentially based on assumptions about child pornographers. State v. Schult, 343 Or. App. 376 (Sep. 10, 2025). This is a rarity:

Posted in Overbreadth, Particularity | Comments Off on OR: CP warrant was overbroad

OR: Cell phone SW was fatally overbroad for scope of search

This cell phone warrant was based on probable cause, and it was particular as to drug related information with a specific time period. However, it was overbroad because it, as the state argued, essentially let the state seize anything else … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Overbreadth, Overseizure | Comments Off on OR: Cell phone SW was fatally overbroad for scope of search

S.D.N.Y.: SW can issue to find evidence of a conspiracy

Defendant challenges this search warrant which refers to seeking potential evidence of a conspiracy where the officer only has evidence of overt acts. On the totality, the court finds probable cause and nexus and that the warrant is not overbroad. … Continue reading

Posted in Nexus, Overbreadth | Comments Off on S.D.N.Y.: SW can issue to find evidence of a conspiracy

W.D.Pa.: Overbreadth of SW determined by what officers did, not what they thought

In this child pornography case, the warrant was narrowed by the attached affidavit. In addition, the generality of the warrant is determined by what the officers did, not what they thought. United States v. Anderson, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89056 … Continue reading

Posted in Overbreadth, Particularity | Comments Off on W.D.Pa.: Overbreadth of SW determined by what officers did, not what they thought

D.Kan.: Marion County Record retaliatory newspaper search case

In the Marion County Record case, the now infamous case of a search warrant for a newspaper’s servers and all electronic devices based on a First Amendment retaliation claim, the main Fourth Amendment claim survives the motions to dismiss. The … Continue reading

Posted in Computer and cloud searches, Overbreadth, Overseizure | Comments Off on D.Kan.: Marion County Record retaliatory newspaper search case

CA9: “[E]vidence of dominion and control provision” sought in this CP SW made it overbroad–withdrawn

The “evidence of dominion and control provision” sought in this child pornography search warrant made it overbroad. United States v. Holcomb, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 7135 (9th Cir. Mar. 27, 2025) (opinion withdrawn, new opinion to follow, United States v. … Continue reading

Posted in Overbreadth, Particularity | Comments Off on CA9: “[E]vidence of dominion and control provision” sought in this CP SW made it overbroad–withdrawn

PA: Contents of a closed shoebox wasn’t in plain view

The contents of a closed shoebox were not in plain view. Commonwealth v. Herlth, 2025 PA Super 73, 2025 Pa. Super. LEXIS 138 (Mar. 24, 2025). “In sum, the evidence before the Court shows that the PGPD and the FBI … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Emergency / exigency, Overbreadth, Plain view, feel, smell | Comments Off on PA: Contents of a closed shoebox wasn’t in plain view

CO: Quantity of documents sought in SW doesn’t make it overbroad

This documents warrant was particular. While it sought a lot of information, that alone didn’t make it overbroad. It was also limited in time to six months of information. People v. Rodriguez-Ortiz, 2025 COA 30 (Mar. 20, 2025):

Posted in Overbreadth, Scope of search | Comments Off on CO: Quantity of documents sought in SW doesn’t make it overbroad

AK: Overbroad part of cell phone SW was severable from the valid part, and that properly came in at trial

This cell phone search warrant was not particular and without probable cause as to “app data,” but it was as to text messages. “If this unlawful provision was the only provision of the warrant that authorized a search for Facebook … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Motion to suppress, Overbreadth, Probable cause | Comments Off on AK: Overbroad part of cell phone SW was severable from the valid part, and that properly came in at trial

MA: SW for “controlled substances” without specifying anything in particular was overbroad

Search warrant for “controlled substances” without specifying anything in particular, including what the controlled buy allegedly was, was overbroad. In addition, the warrant wasn’t present at the search, so it can’t help limit the search [which seems kind of a … Continue reading

Posted in Inevitable discovery, Inventory, Issue preclusion, Overbreadth, Particularity, Strip search | Comments Off on MA: SW for “controlled substances” without specifying anything in particular was overbroad

OR: First cell phone SW found unexpected SD card, second SW was tainted by overbreadth of first

Defendant’s cell phone was seized in 2011 and an SD card was unexpectedly found with sexual images of children. When defendant questioned that, a separate search warrant was sought for the SD card. The state does not show inevitable discovery … Continue reading

Posted in Abandonment, Cell phones, Ineffective assistance, Inevitable discovery, Overbreadth | Comments Off on OR: First cell phone SW found unexpected SD card, second SW was tainted by overbreadth of first

N.D.Ala.: All parts of a SW are read in context, and that narrows it so it’s not overbroad

Defendant seizes on one sentence in the search warrant to contend that it was overbroad. Under Andresen, parts of warrants are read in context. In context, it was not overbroad. United States v. Canaday, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64639 (N.D. … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Good faith exception, Overbreadth | Comments Off on N.D.Ala.: All parts of a SW are read in context, and that narrows it so it’s not overbroad

N.D.Ohio: The residence had two front doors but could not be definitively determined to be two residences before search; search still valid when it was two

The residential building searched had two front doors but one address. This suggested that it might be two residences, but police investigating couldn’t find any indication that it was two, not one. In any event, the warrant was based on … Continue reading

Posted in Overbreadth, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on N.D.Ohio: The residence had two front doors but could not be definitively determined to be two residences before search; search still valid when it was two

Cal.: Partial overbreadth can lead to suppression in egregious cases with flagrant constitutional violations, but this isn’t one

While partial overbreadth can lead to suppression of everything seized in an egregious case with flagrant misconduct, this isn’t one: “And as in Bradford and Kraft, we conclude that the facts here do not warrant this extreme remedy.” “According to … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Nexus, Overbreadth, Standing | Comments Off on Cal.: Partial overbreadth can lead to suppression in egregious cases with flagrant constitutional violations, but this isn’t one

CA2: Pending 2255 petition justifies denial of Rule 41(g) petition

The business’s petition for return of records obtained by search warrant and grand jury subpoena is denied. The business’s principal is still litigating his criminal case and a 2255 is pending, and that justifies it. Allen v. Grist Mill Capital … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Overbreadth, Qualified immunity, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on CA2: Pending 2255 petition justifies denial of Rule 41(g) petition

AR: HBO film crew ride-along on drug raid doesn’t lead to suppression

An HBO film crew was doing a ride-along with the DEA and local DTF officers for the making of “Meth Storm.” Defendant raises via post-conviction that the ride-along film crew violated the Fourth Amendment and the state constitution. The court … Continue reading

Posted in Cell site location information, Good faith exception, Ineffective assistance, Motion to suppress, Overbreadth, Warrant execution | Comments Off on AR: HBO film crew ride-along on drug raid doesn’t lead to suppression