Groh v. Ramirez

ATF agent Groh applied for a warrant to search Ramirez's ranch for weapons, but the warrant itself failed to describe the items to be seized-instead describing Ramirez's house-though the supporting application and affidavit accurately listed the items. A magistrate issued the warrant; nothing was found and no charges were filed. Ramirez sued Groh for a Fourth Amendment violation. The district court found Groh had qualified immunity; the Ninth Circuit reversed.

Whether the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule applies to evidence obtained under a warrant that failed to describe the items to be seized.