The search warrant was particular and not overbroad. The subject matter of the investigation sufficiently limited the search even though time wasn’t otherwise specified. United States v. Hugger, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123081 (S.D. Fla. July 12, 2022):
Defendant takes issue with two aspects of the search warrant. He first contends that the warrant is unconstitutional because it did not limit the search to relevant dates. He also argues that the warrant did not adequately limit the search to items connected with the stated crimes.
After reviewing the warrant, the Court finds it sufficiently detailed and particularized to the crimes under investigation. To begin, the warrant clearly sets forth the Florida “Statute(s) Being Violated,” including the title of each of the offenses being investigated. Under the section of the warrant titled “Property Sought,” the affiant states he seeks to search Defendant’s iPhone for property, described in number paragraphs, “as it is evidence of violations of the above-named statutes.” And almost all the numbered paragraphs describe the property sought in reference to either the statutes being violated or to the events described in the probable cause section of the affidavit for the search warrant.
In an evolving investigation like the one surrounding Defendant’s arrest, the warrant obtained was sufficiently tailored so that the searcher could reasonably ascertain and identify the things authorized to be seized. Even though the warrant did not provide a time period for which items could be searched, the subject-matter limitation of the warrant adequately particularized the warrant by constitutional standards.