12-20-2024, 07:52 PM
The warrant is a general warrant because it does not particularize what they are wanting to seize in the computer. Instead, it seizes "Any and all computers" as well as " any and all magnetic or optical media, including but not limited to hard disk drives, floppy disks, compact discs, DVDs, USB devices, and any and all passwords or other computer security devices, and any and all information and data stored in the form of magnetic or electronic coding on computer media or on media capable of being read by a computer or with the aid of computer equipment, any and all computer software, any and all evidence, data or information pertaining to the possession including but not limited to: any and all evidence of dominion and control over the computer" meaning they are seizing EVEYTHING within the computer.
The US Federal Courts, including the US Supreme Court has stated that you cannot seize ever piece of data in an electronic device. " The police did not have probable cause to believe that everything on the phone was evidence of the crime of public indecency.” United States v. Winn, 79 F. Supp. 3d 904, 919 (S.D. Ill. 2015) and “The Supreme Court put the scope of such a wholesale seizure in perspective by explaining that it “would typically expose the government to far more than the most exhaustive search of a house.” Riley v. California, ––– U.S. ––––, 134 S.Ct. 2473, 2491, 189 L.Ed.2d 430 (2014) ” United States v. Winn, 79 F. Supp. 3d 904, 919 (S.D. Ill. 2015)
United States v. Winn, 79 F. Supp. 3d 904, 919 (S.D. Ill. 2015)
The search warrant must limit the scope of the search to the thing which they have probable cause (Furthermore, when the search involves digital media, the Seventh Circuit has instructed police officers “to exercise caution to ensure that warrants describe with particularity the things to be seized and that searches are narrowly tailored to uncover only those things described.” United States v. Mann,592 F.3d 779, 786 (7th Cir.2010). ~ United States v. Winn, 79 F. Supp. 3d 904, 919 (S.D. Ill. 2015)
The US Federal Courts, including the US Supreme Court has stated that you cannot seize ever piece of data in an electronic device. " The police did not have probable cause to believe that everything on the phone was evidence of the crime of public indecency.” United States v. Winn, 79 F. Supp. 3d 904, 919 (S.D. Ill. 2015) and “The Supreme Court put the scope of such a wholesale seizure in perspective by explaining that it “would typically expose the government to far more than the most exhaustive search of a house.” Riley v. California, ––– U.S. ––––, 134 S.Ct. 2473, 2491, 189 L.Ed.2d 430 (2014) ” United States v. Winn, 79 F. Supp. 3d 904, 919 (S.D. Ill. 2015)
United States v. Winn, 79 F. Supp. 3d 904, 919 (S.D. Ill. 2015)
The search warrant must limit the scope of the search to the thing which they have probable cause (Furthermore, when the search involves digital media, the Seventh Circuit has instructed police officers “to exercise caution to ensure that warrants describe with particularity the things to be seized and that searches are narrowly tailored to uncover only those things described.” United States v. Mann,592 F.3d 779, 786 (7th Cir.2010). ~ United States v. Winn, 79 F. Supp. 3d 904, 919 (S.D. Ill. 2015)