Opinion ID: 1452969
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: General Search in Violation of the Fourth Amendment

Text: Garcia first argues that the officers engaged in an unlawful general search of his residence in violation of the Fourth Amendment. The phrase general search embodies a specific Fourth Amendment term of art, accompanied by particular rules, policies, and remedies. A search pursuant to a valid warrant may devolve into an invalid general search if the officers flagrant[ly] disregard . . . the limitations of [the] search warrant. United States v. Lambert, 771 F.2d 83, 93 (6th Cir.1985). For purposes of general search analysis, we will find that an officer flagrantly disregards the limitations of a warrant only where he exceed[s] the scope of the warrant in the places searched (rather than the items seized). See Waller v. Georgia, 467 U.S. 39, 43 n. 3, 104 S.Ct. 2210, 81 L.Ed.2d 31 (1984) (emphasis added); see also United States v. Decker, 956 F.2d 773, 779 (8th Cir.1992) (The flagrant disregard standard applies only where the government exceeds the scope of the authorized search in terms of the places searched, and not to cases in which the government indulges in excessive seizures.). The test for determining if the officers engaged in an impermissible general search is whether their search unreasonably exceeded the scope of the warrant. Brindley v. Best, 192 F.3d 525, 531 (6th Cir.1999). The prohibition against general searches . . . serves primarily as a protection against unjustified intrusions on privacy, Horton v. California, 496 U.S. 128, 141, 110 S.Ct. 2301, 110 L.Ed.2d 112 (1990), and the broad remedy for such a sweeping Fourth Amendment violation is the suppression of all evidence seized during the search, Lambert, 771 F.2d at 93 (emphasis added); see also United States v. Uzenski, 434 F.3d 690, 706 (4th Cir.2006) (stating that blanket suppression is an extraordinary remedy only to be used when the officers' violations of the warrant's limitations are extreme). In contrast, the prohibition against the unlawful seizure of a particular item during an otherwise valid search does not invade the defendant's privacy interest but merely deprives [him] of dominion over his . . . property, Horton, 496 U.S. at 133, 110 S.Ct. 2301, and the narrow remedy for such a concrete Fourth Amendment violation is the suppression of only the unlawfully seized evidence, see Waller, 467 U.S. at 43 n. 3, 104 S.Ct. 2210; Decker, 956 F.2d at 779. Thus, where the officers unlawfully seize certain items but do not flagrantly disregard the limits of the warrant by unreasonably searching places not authorized in the warrant, the court must suppress the unlawfully seized items, but there is certainly no requirement that lawfully seized evidence be suppressed as well. Waller, 467 U.S. at 43 n. 3, 104 S.Ct. 2210. The search warrant for Garcia's residence authorized the officers to peruse every area of the house  including all garages, outhouses, edifices, structures, openings, and enclosures, thereto  in search of an item that can be hidden in small and discrete places (i.e., cocaine). Garcia does not argue that the officers searched places not authorized in the warrant; instead he contends that the officers' seizure of more than one hundred documents exhibited their flagrant disregard for the terms of the warrant. Because Garcia couches his argument as a challenge to the extent of the officers' seizure, rather than the scope of their search, we find that his general search argument lacks merit. See Waller, 467 U.S. at 43 n. 3, 104 S.Ct. 2210. In any event, given that the warrant authorized the officers to look anywhere on Garcia's property for a small, easy-to-conceal item, it would be extremely difficult for Garcia to establish that the officers searched in places not authorized by this particular warrant. We conclude that the officers' search of Garcia's residence did not exceed the scope of the warrant  much less unreasonably so  and hold that the officers' search did not amount to an impermissible general search of Garcia's residence.