The following excerpt is from United States v. Sedaghaty, D.C. No.6:05-cr-60008-HO-2, No. 11-30342 (9th Cir. 2013):
The supervising agent here may well have believed that the affidavit took precedence over the warrant, but the subjective state of mind of the officer executing the warrant is not material to our initial inquiry. United States v. Ewain, 88 F.3d 689, 694 (9th Cir. 1996) ("A policeman's pure heart does not entitle him to exceed the scope of a search warrant . . . ."). Any other conclusion would elevate the author of the incorporated probable cause affidavit over the judge issuing the warrant. Cf. Johnson v. United States, 333 U.S. 10, 13-14 (1948) (noting that the Fourth Amendment requires that any inferences from the evidence be "drawn by a neutral and detached magistrate instead of being judged by the officer engaged in the often competitive enterprise of ferreting out crime").
The district court determined that the "fact that a further warrant was requested when information possibly relating to
Page 53
a separate crime was discovered belies the allegations that the search was a general fishing expedition." That may be. But the fact that the government sought a separate warrant for some materials outside the scope of the warrant does not somehow countenance the seizure of other materials outside its scope. Cf. United States v. Crozier, 777 F.2d 1376, 1381 (9th Cir. 1985) ("A search must be limited to the terms of the warrant."). To the extent the agents wanted to seize relevant information beyond the scope of the warrant, they should have sought a further warrant.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.