CA8: SW for CP didn’t include “cell phone” in “electronic devices,” but GFE covers it

The search warrant here was for electronic devices that could hold child pornography, and it failed to specifically mention defendant’s cell phone. The good faith exception, however, overcame this omission of particularity. United States v. Pospisil, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 21381 (8th Cir. July 20, 2021):

The warrant here authorized seizing and searching “electronic data processing and storage devices, computer[s,] and computer systems.” D. Ct. Dkt. 115 at 3. In Suellentrop, a case involving a similar warrant, we explained that “it was not unreasonable for investigators to believe that the state warrant authorized the search of [the defendant’s] phone, along with other electronic devices that might be found [in his home].” 953 F.3d at 1051. Consistent with Suellentrop, we conclude that searching Pospisil’s cell phone was at least “among the objectively reasonable honest mistakes that the Fourth Amendment tolerates.” Id.; see also Maryland v. Garrison, 480 U.S. 79, 87 (1987). The good faith exception to the exclusionary rule applies here.