Opinion ID: 398313
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Adequacy of Identification of Items to be Seized

Text: 74 The district court concluded that Agent Sherrington failed to state any basis in the affidavit for his belief that the articles sought are in any way connected with criminal activity. We disagree. 75 In Warden v. Hayden, 387 U.S. 294, 87 S.Ct. 1642, 18 L.Ed.2d 782 (1967), the Supreme Court held that mere evidence can be seized pursuant to a search warrant if the facts set forth in the affidavit described evidence which will aid in a particular apprehension or conviction. Id. at 307, 87 S.Ct. at 1650. Our task, then, is to determine if the items described in the affidavit would be relevant evidence in aiding the government in this prosecution of Barnett. The facts set forth in the affidavit establish that Barnett stored copies of the incriminating materials which he had sold to Hensley in his residence. 76 The seizure of additional instructions for the manufacture of PCP in Barnett's residence would establish at trial the highly relevant fact that United News Service was the fictitious alter ego of Barnett. Identity of the perpetrator of a crime is essential evidence to sustain any conviction. The presence of such material at Barnett's residence together with proof that Barnett had mailed instructions for the manufacture of illegal drugs to other persons would be admissible to prove that Barnett acted with knowledge and criminal intent. 77 The fact that the items described in the search warrant included objects which did not directly relate to Barnett's transactions with Hensley is immaterial. The government may lawfully seize evidence of other acts if it tends to prove a suspect's intent with respect to criminal activity described in the affidavit in support of the search warrant. Andresen v. Maryland, 427 U.S. 463, 483-84, 96 S.Ct. 2737, 2749-50, 49 L.Ed.2d 627 (1976). 78 We are satisfied that the items identified in the search warrant were described with sufficient specificity and would be admissible as evidence on several grounds in the trial of Barnett for aiding and abetting Hensley. 79