Does the particularity clause in a search warrant application apply to a mobile home?

We hasten to point out that it would have been preferable for the officer to have expressly indicated that the premises as 9110 Temettate Drive, Nipomo, California, was a 40 acre parcel and that the "outbuilding" which Giese wanted to search was approximately one quarter to one half mile away, as the crow flies, from the mobile home. However, his failure to do so does not inexorably compel the conclusion that the particularity clause has been violated. As indicated, the superior court determined that the particularity clause was not violated. Based on an independent judgment standard, we agree. (See People v. Frank, supra, 38 Cal.3d at p.

Page 585