The IP address for the house defendant was staying in was linked to child pornography, and the search warrant for the premises clearly described the single family dwelling. Thus, all the personal property of those associated with the property, except visitors, may be searched. There is no constitutional requirement that the owner’s name be specified. State v. Coblentz, 2016 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 430 (March 23, 2016).
Much of the information in the affidavit for the search warrant for heroin was many months old when the police did a more recent trash pull and found evidence of THC and “narcotics” without mentioning what or whether it was illegal. The affidavit, however, credited a CI with the claim that defendant uses (present tense) the property now for distribution of heroin. Coupled with the prior information, the magistrate had a substantial basis for concluding that evidence of drug trafficking would be found. In any event, the good faith exception applies. United States v. McDonald, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75553 (S.D.Ohio June 9, 2016).* [Note: This one is too thin for me to agree with. The CI here was essentially corroborated by what happened nearly a year earlier? That’s just hard to accept.]