or other incriminating evidence inadvertently found during the execution of the warrant, it is abundantly clear from the testimony of Martin, as well as the testimony of Wilson and Cowart, that there was a wholesale seizure of Foster’s property amounting to a fishing expedition for the discovery of incriminating evidence. In fact, upon cross-examination by defense counsel, Martin admitted that the officers “took anything of value” and that this was standard procedure in the execution of a Se-quoyah County search warrant. Other than the readily observable firearms, marijuana, and assorted contraband (primarily listed on page three of the she t this court must determine whether the execution of the search warrant was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. See Callwood, 66 F.3d at 1112 (<HOLDING>). It is beyond dispute, based on the facts as
holding that a court of appeals should review de novo a district courts determination of state law recognizing de novo standard of review holding the ultimate question of probable cause should be reviewed de novo holding that review of the construction of a sentencing statute is de novo holding that this court should review de novo ultimate determination of reasonableness of search under fourth amendment