E.D.Wis.: Merely adding “electronic devices” into a drug SW here was enough to search cell phones found during the search

The drug search warrant for the house included drugs, ledgers, documents, safes, and electronic devices to store information. That was sufficient to authorize a search and forensic analysis of two cell phones found inside. United States v. Robinson, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101136 (E.D.Wis. August 3, 2015):

The search warrant, the validity of which Robinson does not challenge, explicitly authorized law enforcement to search the premises at 320 2nd Street where Robinson was living for numerous items of evidence and/or contraband, including: “Heroin, marijuana, drug paraphernalia, other controlled substances; scales, bags, containers and other items used in the manufacture and delivery of controlled substances; ledgers, documents, phone numbers, tapes, pagers, safes and their contents, and other instruments, evidence and drug transactions; electronic devices that record data, i.e. telephone numbers, messages and other electronically stored information, including cell phones and computers ….” (Ex. 1.) The search warrant also authorized law enforcement to conduct “a subsequent forensic examination of said electronic devices to include, but not be limited to, cell phones and computers, inclusive of the data contained within the electronic memory of the device.” (Id.)

Comment: I can’t agree with the cell phone search. Just because a cell phone is found in a house doesn’t mean that it’s connected to drug trade. If the application for the warrant said that calls were made to arrange drug deals, that would be good enough. The court doesn’t tell us. Without connecting the phone to the drug trade, just its being in the house should not be enough.