E.D.Mich.: Full forensic search of a def’s university computer violated particularity and became a general warrant

The motion to suppress the search of devices for lack of particularity is granted, but the cloud search is not. Defendant is accused of hacking into student accounts on the University of Michigan’s computer system. The IT policy says that the university has the ability to search computers that it owns, but that does not apply to the police. The computers searched were used only by him. See United States v. Angevine, 281 F.3d 1130 (10th Cir. 2002). Here, “[t]he lack of particularity in UMPD’s forensic search warrants renders them unconstitutional general warrants.” It was a full forensic search without limits. United States v. Weiss, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146101 (E.D. Mich. July 1, 2026):

That is the defect in the state search warrants here. They called for a full forensic search of the electronic devices and included no limiting language that tied the authorization to the probable cause that was presented in the applications and affidavits. The categories of items to be searched are so numerous and broadly defined that they effectively permit a general search of the devices in their entirety. The search warrants contain no date limitations, and they do not authorize a search for a specific type of criminal activity. They do not direct executing officers to search, for instance, for files related to specific alleged victims or for evidence of misappropriated personal data. Cf. Underwood, 129 F.4th at 936 (finding that warrant authorizing search of “[a]ny electronic data within the aforementioned phones . . . that would be evidence of drug trafficking” satisfied particularity requirement). The UMPD’s forensic search warrants are similar to those that other courts have invalidated for want of particularity. See, e.g., In re 650 Fifth Ave. & Related Props., 934 F.3d at 163; United States v. Santiago, 135 F.4th 1235, 1239-40 (10th Cir. 2025) (holding that warrant authorizing search of defendant’s iPhone without reference to the alleged crimes was “a classic example of the kind of general search the Fourth Amendment is intended to prevent”).

The lack of particularity in UMPD’s forensic search warrants renders them unconstitutional general warrants.

This entry was posted in Computer and cloud searches, General warrant. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.