United States v. Leigh Raymond Tamura

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the “wholesale seizure for later detailed examination of records not described in a warrant” violates the Fourth Amendment
• noting that ʺ[i]n the comparatively rare instances where documents are so intermingled that they cannot feasibly be ‐2‐ sorted on site,ʺ the Government may seize items outside the scope of the warrant under certain conditions
• suggesting that in cases where documents are so intermingled that it is not feasible to sort them out at site of search, government should seal and hold documents pending approval of another search
• scolding the government for its excessive and intrusive procedures in a massively overbroad search, but nevertheless holding that the properly seized evidence should be admitted
• finding that the prosecutor’s testimony would be duplicative impeachment
• permitting, in some instances involving intermingled documents, the seizure of many documents followed by the ability to seek a warrant for material not initially covered by a warrant

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).