Opinion
Case No. 05-80898.
September 14, 2006
ORDER
Defendant has filed a motion styled
Motion to Suppress and Request for an Evidentiary Hearing The government has responded.
The motion is directed to a seizure, pursuant to a valid search of defendant's home based on probable cause to believe drug trafficking was occurring, of a miter saw, two (2) generators and two (2) air compressors. These items were, subsequent to the search and seizure, administratively forfeited. Defendant did not claim ownership or oppose the forfeiture which was done pursuant to state law. Given that the search was based on a valid warrant, the fact that the seizure of the items described were not directly included within the scope of the search warrant is not, by itself, a basis for suppressing the items seized within the scope of the search warrant. The "[u]nlawful seizure of items outside a warrant does not alone render the whole search invalid and require suppression of all evidence seized, including that lawfully taken pursuant to the warrant. A flagrant disregard for the limitations of a search warrant might make an otherwise valid search an impermissible general search requiring the suppression of all evidence seized during the search. Absent flagrant action, however, the items covered by the warrant will be admissible." U.S. v. Lambert, 771 F.2d 83, 93 (6th Cir. 1985) (internal citations omitted). If the government offers the items seized which were not within the scope of that search warrant into evidence at trial, there is time enough to consider whether or not they were illegally seized and forfeited.
The motion is DENIED.
SO ORDERED.