D.Ariz.: Overseizure of emails by SW didn’t require suppression of all; GFE also applies

This search warrant was issued in a SSA fraud case alleging a decade of false claims. The search warrant was sufficiently particular and not overbroad. The fact the period of the alleged offense was through January 2014 did not prohibit the government from seeking a search warrant through December 2016. Overseizure like this, even if unreasonable, don’t lead to suppression of everything because that which is pertinent is not suppressed. Here, the probable cause was through January 2014 but the warrant was through December 2016. United States v. Cummings, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73306 (D. Ariz. Apr. 27, 2020).

An EMT found defendant passed out in his car at a traffic light. The EMT called police. His telling defendant to wait for the police did not invoke the exclusionary rule. State v. Henry, 2020 Del. Super. LEXIS 199 (Apr. 29, 2020).

The probable cause shown in the affidavit for search warrant sufficiently linked defendant’s home to drug dealing to show nexus. State v. Bailey, 2020 N.C. LEXIS 366 (May 1, 2020).

This entry was posted in E-mail, Exclusionary rule, Nexus, Overseizure. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.