Tenth Circuit US v. Pulliam 13-1026

Decision here.

   I'm a little behind, so I'm going to try to be brief with a lot of these.  Especially stuff like this decision which doesn't really change anything.

   Pulliam was charged federally with being a felon in possession of a firearm after a search of his house (with a warrant) led to the discovery of said firearm.  He moved to suppress the search, making a handful of stupid arguments.  He argued that there was no PC in the affidavit because the informant the information came from was untested (the informant in question was identified to the police, was facing his own charges, and was giving up his fellow burglars in return for lenience.  He had already led police to stolen property in other places).  The court disagreed.  He argued that the search was unreasonable because the police didn't give him all the attachments to the warrant.  The court recognized that it probably would have been better for the police to do that, but that this doesn't make the search unreasonable.  After all, it's not like Pulliam would have been entitled to monitor the search to ensure compliance with the warrant... contesting a search is something to be done after the fact in court.  And he argued that the items to be seized were not particular enough, since it included "any and all firearms."  The court held that since Pulliam was a felon, and therefore any firearm would be contraband for him, this description was sufficiently particular.

   Anyway, the search was good and Pulliam's conviction was upheld.