Case 1:14-mj-00228-JMF Document 11 Filed 08/08/14 Page 10 of 21 -10a search warrant sufficiently describes the place to be searched if the officer with a search warrant can, with reasonable effort ascertain and identify the place intended.’” United States v. Vaughn, 830 F.2d 1185, 1186 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (quoting Moore v. United States, 461 F.2d 1236, 1238 (D.C. Cir. 1972)). “The manifest purpose of th[e] particularity requirement was to prevent general searches.” 79, 84 (1987). Maryland v. Garrison, 480 U.S. General warrants “le[ave] to the discretion of the executing officials the decision as to which persons should be arrested and which places should be searched. . . . [These warrants] provide[] no judicial check on the determination of the executing officials that the evidence available justified an intrusion into any particular home.” 451 U.S. 204, 220 (1981). Steagald v. United States, “By limiting the authorization to search to the specific areas and things for which there is probable cause to search,” the Supreme Court has explained, “the [particularity] requirement ensures that the search will be carefully tailored to its justifications, and will not take on the character of the wide-ranging exploratory searches the Framers intended to prohibit.” Garrison, 480 U.S. at 84. A. Application for search warrant The magistrate judge rejected the government’s application as an unconstitutional general warrant not because the government failed to provide sufficient facts to support a