United States v. Charley Hargus

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “receipts and other records” described in the search warrant would be found at defendant’s house and that “there need not be direct evidence or personal knowledge” that the items sought are located at the place to be searched
• concluding the seizure of filing cabinets was reasonable where sorting the records on-site was impracticable
• inferring a nexus to a suspect’s residence based on the small scale of his business, the ongoing nature of the conspiracy at issue, and the fact that he used his home telephone to arrange the sale of stolen goods
• “The officers’ conduct in executing a search warrant is governed by the Fourth Amendment’s mandate of reasonableness from the moment they step into the house until the moment they leave.”
• “[A] search is not invalidated merely because some things are seized that are not stated in the warrant. This is particularly true when the non-specified items are not admitted into evidence against the defendant.”
• “[A] search is not invalidated merely because some things are seized that are not stated in the warrant. This is particularly true when the non-specified items are not admitted into evidence against the defendant.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).