E.D.N.Y.: “MS-13 paraphernalia, photographs, and/or graffiti” satisfied particularity

In a RICO prosecution of MS-13, the search warrant included “MS-13 paraphernalia, photographs, and/or graffiti” and this satisfied particularity. United States v. Saenz, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 231895 (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 27, 2022):

Defendants similarly complain that the phrase “MS-13 paraphernalia, photographs and/or graffiti,” with particular emphasis on the word “paraphernalia,” is too ambiguous to appropriately cabin the searching officers’ authority. Common dictionary definitions suggest that paraphernalia refer to “the miscellaneous items needed for or associated with a particular activity,” while the term “gang paraphernalia” has gained a specific meaning. Messerschmidt v. Millender, 565 U.S. 535, 552, 132 S. Ct. 1235, 182 L. Ed. 2d 47 (2012) (“a reasonable officer could conclude that gang paraphernalia found at the residence would be an effective means of demonstrating Bowen’s control over the premises”). Thus, the Court finds nothing vague or ambiguous with the description of gang paraphernalia in the search warrant, and finds that this category did not offend the Fourth Amendment particularity requirement.

This entry was posted in Particularity. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.