Luke mentions that there was a warrant.
That Luke sometimes--often even--contributes to 'open publishing' media outlets doesn't automatically designate him a reporter.
Even if you make the leap to classifying him as a reporter, and you assume that some of his files may have "reporter's notes," that still doesn't mean that the equipment is exempt from being seized. It's possible and likely that there are all sorts of entirely non-journalist related material there as well. If material that's clearly journalism-related notes start getting entered into evidence in a trial, then you can start screaming bloody murder.

I'm really struck by the irony and idiocy of someone labeling themselves a "fact checker" while being utterly ignorant of the law and without any direct facts or material on this case.

By Luke's account, there was a warrant. Go to the warrant, and you'll get (right or wrong) the police's justification for the raid. And if you want citizen journalists to be taken seriously, don't try to abuse the laws protecting journalists by describing and applying them in inaccurate ways.