Rule 41 doesn\u2019t apply to a state search warrant just because the state officer called the FBI for input. The affidavit was supplemented when presented to the issuing magistrate judge, and that made the affidavit both sufficient and the warrant was particular and the seizure was not overbroad. Besides, the good faith exception applies. United States v. Williams, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31835 (D. S.C. March 12, 2014).*<\/p>\n
\u201cThe search warrant described the items to be seized with sufficient particularity, and the search warrant affidavit established probable cause to believe contraband would be found in Defendant’s apartment. Although the affidavit alone may not have established probable cause to believe that items related to drug distribution and manufacturing would be found in Defendant’s residence, exclusion is not appropriate because the Leon good faith exception applies to the facts of this case.\u201d United States v. Scott, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31788 (N.D. Ala. January 30, 2014),* R&R 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32070 (N.D. Ala. March 11, 2014).*<\/p>\n
Even though the government didn\u2019t rely on it, the fact the officer knew defendant and that there was an arrest warrant for him was reason enough for the stop. Then a dog alert provided probable cause. United States v. Fonville, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31610 (E.D. Mich. March 12, 2014).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading