OPINION & ORDER Defendant Joshua Schulte moves to suppress all document evidence seized from his cell at the Metropolitan Correctional Center (“MCC”) as well as all evidence recovered from subsequent warrants that relied upon the writings seized. (Dkt. 97.) The Defendant urges that suppression is warranted under the Fourth Amendment, the Sixth Amendment, and the doctrine of attorney-client privilege. (Def. Opening Mot. at 1, Dkt. 98.) Further, the Defendant argues that the initial searches were conducted in bad faith and that the Government’s solution of implementing a wall team to conduct a privilege review of Defendant’s documents was inadequate. (Id. at 14.) The Government opposes the motion to suppress and to wholesale suppression of the seized documents. (Gov’t Opp’n, Dkt. 120.) Even if privileged material was seized, the Government argues, the appropriate remedy is suppression of the privileged material, not blanket suppression. (Gov’t Opp’n at 66.) Further, the Government contends that the use of the wall team to review for potential privilege was appropriate, and that it does not intend to introduce any of the purportedly privileged documents identified by the Defendant. (Id. at 64-65, 72.) The Court DENIES the Defendant’s motion to suppress the evidence seized from MCC. BACKGROUND Defendant Joshua Schulte has been incarcerated in MCC since December 14, 2017. Between October 2, 2018 and October 26, 2018, the Government obtained multiple warrants to search for evidence related to offenses allegedly committed by Schulte during his detention in MCC. The first warrant (“MCC Search Warrant”) authorized law enforcement to search for “[a]ny and all notes, documents, records, correspondence, or materials, in any format and medium…pertaining to the unauthorized retention, gathering, and transmission of classified documents or materials, and the unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or materials” (Def. Ex. A, MCC Search Warrant, Attach. A III. A 6.) The warrant also authorized the seizure of evidence pertaining to contraband cell phones. (Id.) On October 3, 2018, the FBI searched the MCC premises. During that search, government agents seized two notebooks labeled “ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE” on the cover and “ATTORNEY CLIENT CONFIDENTIAL” or “ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE” on the inside covers. The notebooks appeared to contain handwritten text possibly written by Schulte. During that review, the agents identified some writings appearing to be potentially classified and others which appeared to pertain to Schulte’s defense. (Def. Ex. B, Wall Review Aff. 3.) The agents stopped the review and consulted with the Government. In 24 hours, the agents obtained a second warrant, which authorized law enforcement agents (i.e., wall team) who were not a part of the prosecution team to review the notebooks, segregate out materials deemed privileged, and provide materials deemed non-privileged to the prosecution team. (Def. Ex. C, Wall Review Warrant, Attach. A, III. B
