M.D.Fla.: SW’s particularity had a reference back to “property connected with the above listed crime(s)” and that’s particular

Despite renting a hotel room in a false name, defendant had standing to challenge the search of the room because he rented it and he was sleeping there and had his stuff there. The search warrant was based on an affidavit for heroin sales, and the warrant’s particularity had a reference back to “property connected with the above listed crime(s),” and that’s particular enough. United States v. Rocher, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30262 (M.D. Fla. Feb. 26, 2018).

Responding to defendant’s challenge that the search under the warrant was invalid, the court looked first to the good faith exception which the court reviews de novo. The affidavit for the warrant was not “bare bones.” It showed what the officers did try to investigate the CI’s information and other police intel, along with the fact they employed various “investigative techniques,” which the court doesn’t elaborate on. The fact it was not bare bones means that the officers “could have” relied upon it. Second, there was probable cause in any event. United States v. Huerra, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 4858 (5th Cir. Feb. 27, 2018).*