In State v. Alvarez, 318 N.J. Super. 137, 145-48, 723 A.2d 91 (App.Div.1999), the defendant was convicted of various weapons offenses based on evidence obtained in a search of a house where he resided together with other transients. The State presented evidence that the search was conducted pursuant to a warrant and that there also was a warrant for defendant's arrest before the search was conducted. The State did not present any evidence concerning the basis for the issuance of either warrant. The defense was that the weapons were not found in defendant's own bedroom and could have belonged to any of the various other persons who resided in the house. The Court concluded that evidence of the search warrant was prejudicial because it "suggested that a judicial officer with knowledge of the law and the facts believed that evidence of criminality would be found in defendant's room," and that "the repetitive references to the arrest warrant for defendant suffered the exact infirmities we condemned in State v. Milton." 318 N.J. Super. at 148, 723 A.2d 91.