Andresen v. Maryland
United States Supreme Court
427 U.S. 463 (1976)
Investigators obtained warrants to search attorney Andresen's (defendant) offices for documents related to a specific fraudulent real-estate transaction, including a catchall phrase covering "other fruits, instrumentalities and evidence of crime at this (time) unknown"; Andresen moved to suppress the seized documents at his fraud trial, arguing the catchall made the warrants unconstitutionally general and that admitting his own business records violated his right against self-incrimination.
Whether the introduction into evidence of a person's business records seized from the person's office violates the Fifth Amendment right against compelled self-incrimination, and whether a catchall phrase added to a warrant's item list renders it an unconstitutional general warrant under the Fourth Amendment.