DE: “The scope of the warrant so far outruns that probable cause finding—and is so lacking in particularity relative to that probable cause finding—that it qualifies as plain error.”

A rare outcome: “The scope of the warrant so far outruns that probable cause finding—and is so lacking in particularity relative to that probable cause finding—that it qualifies as plain error.” Buckham v. State, 2018 Del. LEXIS 166 (Apr. 18, 2018):

So despite the court’s view that the affidavit did only “a minimal amount of work to try to justify the warrant” and “[s]urely” could have been better, the affidavit’s suggestion that a search of the phone could uncover GPS data that could lead the police to further evidence was enough to uphold the magistrate’s determination that there was probable cause to search. And on that basis, the court upheld the warrant. But the court failed to address the fact that the warrant it upheld was plainly mismatched to the probable cause it cited to justify it. To be fair, neither did Buckham, but the scope of the warrant so far outruns that probable cause finding—and is so lacking in particularity relative to that probable cause finding—that it qualifies as plain error.