United States v. Suggs, 998 F.3d 1125 (10th Cir. June 2, 2021)
On appeal from denial of his motion to suppress, Suggs argued that evidence linking him to a road-rage shooting was obtained through unconstitutionally broad search warrants. The Tenth Circuit agreed, reversing the district court’s denial of the motion to suppress and remanding for further proceedings. The evidence at issue was obtained under the warrants’ catch-all clauses, which permitted police to look for and seize “[a]ny item identified as being involved in a crime[.]” The Tenth Circuit concluded that this expansive language lacked the particularity mandated by the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Although a supporting affidavit was physically attached to the warrant, the warrant itself did not incorporate the affidavit by reference and, therefore, the information in the affidavit could not be relied upon to cure the warrant’s lack of particularity.