Opinion ID: 1187703
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Sufficiency of Search Warrant

Text: It is constitutionally required that a search warrant shall particularly describe the place to be searched. State v. Gordon, 221 Kan. 253, Syl. ¶ 4, 559 P.2d 312 (1977). A search warrant directed against a multiple occupancy structure generally will be held invalid if it fails to describe the particular room or subunit to be searched with sufficient definiteness to preclude a search of other units. 221 Kan. 253, Syl. ¶ 7. Wakefield argues that a fair reading of the search warrant would exclude, rather than include, authorization for the search of 1636. The contrary is true. The warrant clearly stated that Scott had told Wilson that the guns from the burglary were hidden in the rear structure at 1638 N. Woodland. The search warrant particularly authorized the search of the 1636 complex even though it did not state the smaller residence number. Even if the warrant had included both house numbers, the number of the smaller residence would have been of no use to the officers because no house number was affixed to the smaller residence. The search warrant particularly described the area to be searched and authorized the search of the rear structure. The judge did not err in failing to suppress the evidence seized in 1636 pursuant to the search warrant.