Opinion ID: 49000
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Guiding Supreme Court Precedent

Text: 10 Like this case, Maryland v. Garrison, 480 U.S. 79, 107 S.Ct. 1013, 94 L.Ed.2d 72 (1987), involved the constitutionality of a search executed pursuant to a warrant authorizing the search of a structure that turned out to contain more individual residences than was believed at the time the warrant was issued. In Garrison, Baltimore police obtained a warrant to search the third floor apartment of 2036 Park Avenue. Id. at 80, 107 S.Ct. 1013. When applying for the warrant and when executing it, police reasonably believed that the third floor of that address had only one apartment and that this apartment was occupied by the suspect McWebb. Id. at 81, 107 S.Ct. 1013. In the course of their search, the police realized that the third floor actually contained two apartments, and that they were in the process of searching the apartment of Garrison. Id. The officers ceased their search of Garrison's quarters, but the contraband they had discovered before doing so became the basis for Garrison's conviction. Id. at 80-81, 107 S.Ct. 1013. The Supreme Court held that under the circumstances presented, the seizure of contraband from Garrison's apartment did not violate the Fourth Amendment. Id. at 88, 107 S.Ct. 1013. 11 While the instant case is not identical to Garrison in all relevant particulars, Garrison does lay out a framework for how the analysis of this case should proceed. There, the Supreme Court stated that [i]n our view, the case presents two separate constitutional issues, one concerning the validity of the warrant and the other concerning the reasonableness of the manner in which it was executed. Id. at 84, 107 S.Ct. 1013. Perez's appeal presents the same two overarching issues. 12