Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Criminal Law Blogs -> Fourth Amendment

Criminal Law

: Fourth Amendment

Particularity failure is same as no warrant at all, and Hudson will not save it

By John Wesley Hall, Jr.

In a conceded violation of the particularity clause under Groh v. Ramirez, the government argues that the exclusionary rule should not apply under Hudson. The court disagrees because a failure of particularity is the same as no search warrant at all, and this is a classic situation for application of the exclusionary rule. Finally, the good faith exception does not apply. United States v. Ryan, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29690 (D. Vt. March 31, 2008) [this is a PACER link; document is free]: A. Interests Protected by the Constitutional Guarantee First, the Government relies on Hudson v. Michigan for the proposition that exclusion is inappropriate if "the interest protected by the constitutional guarantee ... would not be served by suppression of the evidence obtained...continue to full post

Full post as published by Fourth Amendment on April 14, 2008 (boomark / email).