It's really hard for me to see this from the prosecutor's side, but I'll try.
1) His 4th Amendment rights were initially violated since the police only had a warrant to arrest him on assault charges. Once they did that at the door, the search of the rest of the apartment was illegal, since it could not be justified as necessary for officer safety or any other reason.
2) His 4th and 6th Amendment rights were violated when the police executed the 2nd search warrent, since they relied upon the prior illegally obtained evidence and a hearsay statement from a jailhouse snitch.
1) Could argue that they were doing a sweep. But it's a loser.
2) Could argue that as warrants aren't held to the same standard as criminal
convictions, the police's warrant was validly obtained, even though it was based on information that would otherwise be suppressed before trial
Should rule in favor of Deft on both counts for above stated reasons, and because 2nd search was also fruits of the posionous tree, since it stemmed from knowledge that was only gained in an illegal search.