Opinion ID: 172792
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Whether the constitutional right was clearly established at the time of Rector's conduct

Text: The search at issue took place on July 18, 2006. By 1927, the Supreme Court had held that [t]he requirement that warrants shall particularly describe the things to be seized makes general searches under them impossible and prevents the seizure of one thing under a warrant describing another. Marron v. United States, 275 U.S. 192, 196, 48 S.Ct. 74, 72 L.Ed. 231 (1927). And in 1990, the Court explained that [i]f the scope of the search exceeds that permitted by the terms of a validly issued warrant or the character of the relevant exception from the warrant requirement, the subsequent seizure is unconstitutional without more. Horton, 496 U.S. at 140, 110 S.Ct. 2301. As it would have been clear to a reasonable officer in July of 2006 that exceeding the scope of a search warrant was unlawful, the constitutional right at issue was clearly established at the time of Rector's conduct. See Cortez, 478 F.3d at 1114.