By American standards, that seems surprisingly simple. I was expecting at least a 5-page form in triplicate, asking the LEO to identify the suspect’s mother’s sister’s maiden name, etc.
I find most amusing the fact that both pages are editable. Are you expected to forecast the time at which you executed the warrant and predict what exact items you have filled out on the second page or get the judge to fill out the warrant after you’ve executed it and filled out the second page?
How about a fill in the blanks supporting affidavit form?
What has bugged me for years was that, in the affidavit supporting the Waco search warrant, the ATF agent told the judge: “Mr. Block told me that he observed a .50 caliber rifle mounted on a bipod along with .50 caliber ammunition. However, what Mr. Block described to ATF agents was a British Boys .52 caliber anti-tank rifle (a destructive device.)”
There was no contraband Boys anti-tank rifle ever found (besides they are .55 caliber not .52), just two legal .50 Barret’s rifles.
SOOOO, boilerplate federal affidavit form could include:
(Enter witness name here) told me that he observed a (enter legal item described by witness). However, what the witness described to our expert agents was immediately recognized as a (enter similar but contraband item here).
PrometheeFeu: I find most amusing the fact that both pages are editable. Are you expected to forecast the time at which you executed the warrant and predict what exact items
Uh… yes? Have you even TRIED reading the Constitution?
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
When I was at Georgetown, my Criminal Procedure prof, the late Sam Dash, told of his days as a prosecutor, when some of the judges in Philly would leave a stack of blank, signed warrants outside their doors at night, rather than having to be woken up to determine whether PC existed for the requested warrant.
Yes, that’s covered on the first page. He’s referring to the second page, which asks for an inventory of what was actually found. But I think the answer is you don’t fill the second page out until later, and in practice it’s often handwritten.
rumpelstiltskin: Uh… yes? Have you even TRIED reading the Constitution? (Quote)
I suspect this is among those things that never change – in Philly, at least.
Hoya Saxa: When I was at Georgetown, my Criminal Procedure prof, the late Sam Dash, told of his days as a prosecutor, when some of the judges in Philly would leave a stack of blank, signed warrants outside their doors at night, rather than having to be woken up to determine whether PC existed for the requested warrant. (Quote)
Is there something weird going on here at the VC with posts disappearing or waiting to be approved or something like that? It just seems to be working weird today.
Look at the blank warrant. Page 2 is clearly intended to be filled out after the warrant has already been executed. It is named “Return” It has a field “Date and time warrant executed” another ”
Inventory of the property taken and name of any person(s) seized”, “Copy of warrant and inventory left with:” etc…
I’m actually assuming they simply didn’t think about it. But at the time the warrant is issued, you should clearly not be in a position to fill out page 2.
rumpelstiltskin:
Uh… yes? Have you even TRIED reading the Constitution?
Yes. Have you tried to read the blank warrant? It has fields for the time and date where the warrant has been executed, an inventory of items recovered etc… Those are clearly meant to be filled out when you have recovered items in the past which means after the warrant has already been issued.
PrometheeFeu: I find most amusing the fact that both pages are editable.
Fill out first page. Print Page 1. Serve warrant. Fill out second page. Print Page 2. Return to magistrate.
Several years ago one of our newer district judges hosted a social event for a local non-profit. He sent out invitations that looked like subpoenas, all in good fun. Apparently several of the recipients, or family members who checked the mail box, suffered heart palpitations and generally got the vapors before they figured out the “joke.” The experiment has not been replicated.
Prof. Kerr probably can come up with a standard 4th am. claim of exclusion of evidence, complete with citations and explication of various doctrins, where the party should just substitute facts of the case in the appropriate blanks.
Martinned: By American standards, that seems surprisingly simple. I was expecting at least a 5-page form in triplicate, asking the LEO to identify the suspect’s mother’s sister’s maiden name, etc.
Well, this has to be filled out by police officers, so they want it to be as easy to follow as possible. If the general public had to deal with it, I’m sure it would be worse.
D.O.: Prof. Kerr probably can come up with a standard 4th am. claim of exclusion of evidence, complete with citations and explication of various doctrins, where the party should just substitute facts of the case in the appropriate blanks.
Prof. Kerr does mainly appellate work, so I doubt he has one handy. Any attorney who has done criminal trial litigation, otoh, does have one that he has used many times.
If it makes you feel better, judges’ chambers also have a form for dismissing those motions, with appropriate citations. They get a lot of use. ;)
Methinks Professor Kerr may be subtly suggesting that, notwithstanding various “open government” movements, some forms simply shouldn’t be made available for every jokester in the world on the public uscourts.gov website?
FWIW: This form is most commonly printed double-sided on one piece of paper, which is an artifact of how GPO produced them in hard copy format in the not-distant past (and if you’re a real old-timer, you may even remember the carbon copy triplicate version). Post-search, agents fill in the back side of the return copy by hand or using an ancient device still sometimes seen on TV cop show reruns, called a “typewriter.”
I guess possessing those forms for educational purposes is not a malum prohibitum, but wouldn’t actually using them (even as a gag) without authority be some sort of malum in se?
Anonimus says:
[Deleted by OK]
January 24, 2012, 2:42 pmCrunchy Frog says:
Do they come pre-signed? That always helps.
January 24, 2012, 2:43 pmMartinned says:
By American standards, that seems surprisingly simple. I was expecting at least a 5-page form in triplicate, asking the LEO to identify the suspect’s mother’s sister’s maiden name, etc.
January 24, 2012, 2:55 pmPrometheeFeu says:
I find most amusing the fact that both pages are editable. Are you expected to forecast the time at which you executed the warrant and predict what exact items you have filled out on the second page or get the judge to fill out the warrant after you’ve executed it and filled out the second page?
January 24, 2012, 3:01 pmAnderson says:
Critics say: “Unwarrantably amusing!”
January 24, 2012, 3:10 pmCarl N. Brown says:
How about a fill in the blanks supporting affidavit form?
What has bugged me for years was that, in the affidavit supporting the Waco search warrant, the ATF agent told the judge: “Mr. Block told me that he observed a .50 caliber rifle mounted on a bipod along with .50 caliber ammunition. However, what Mr. Block described to ATF agents was a British Boys .52 caliber anti-tank rifle (a destructive device.)”
There was no contraband Boys anti-tank rifle ever found (besides they are .55 caliber not .52), just two legal .50 Barret’s rifles.
SOOOO, boilerplate federal affidavit form could include:
(Enter witness name here) told me that he observed a (enter legal item described by witness). However, what the witness described to our expert agents was immediately recognized as a (enter similar but contraband item here).
January 24, 2012, 3:21 pmZathras says:
And April Fools’ Day is just a couple of months away.
January 24, 2012, 3:45 pmBlue says:
Nothing could possibly go wrong with this plan.
January 24, 2012, 3:52 pmHouston Lawyer says:
Should be a separate inventory of items destroyed while conducting the search.
January 24, 2012, 4:10 pmrumpelstiltskin says:
Uh… yes? Have you even TRIED reading the Constitution?
January 24, 2012, 4:16 pmHoya Saxa says:
When I was at Georgetown, my Criminal Procedure prof, the late Sam Dash, told of his days as a prosecutor, when some of the judges in Philly would leave a stack of blank, signed warrants outside their doors at night, rather than having to be woken up to determine whether PC existed for the requested warrant.
January 24, 2012, 4:23 pmAnderson says:
And April Fools’ Day is just a couple of months away.
See, I was thinking Valentine’s Day.
January 24, 2012, 4:27 pmJay says:
Yes, that’s covered on the first page. He’s referring to the second page, which asks for an inventory of what was actually found. But I think the answer is you don’t fill the second page out until later, and in practice it’s often handwritten.
January 24, 2012, 4:33 pmFub says:
And names and breeds of puppy dogs executed for wagging their tails and licking officer’s hand in a threatening manner.
January 24, 2012, 4:40 pmChrisTS says:
January 24, 2012, 4:44 pmDan Z. says:
Is there something weird going on here at the VC with posts disappearing or waiting to be approved or something like that? It just seems to be working weird today.
January 24, 2012, 4:46 pmChrisTS says:
“So much fun it should be illegal!” gushes fan.
January 24, 2012, 4:46 pmM. Gross says:
Remember, bring extra ammo, Basset hounds are at least 5 bullets a dog.
I think shooting it in front of the kids makes it a Police Cruelty Hat Trick (TM)
January 24, 2012, 5:13 pmJBS says:
Great work on NBC’s Today Show this morning- sad they didn’t have you on longer.
January 24, 2012, 5:14 pmPrometheeFeu says:
Look at the blank warrant. Page 2 is clearly intended to be filled out after the warrant has already been executed. It is named “Return” It has a field “Date and time warrant executed” another ”
Inventory of the property taken and name of any person(s) seized”, “Copy of warrant and inventory left with:” etc…
I’m actually assuming they simply didn’t think about it. But at the time the warrant is issued, you should clearly not be in a position to fill out page 2.
January 24, 2012, 5:48 pmPrometheeFeu says:
Yes. Have you tried to read the blank warrant? It has fields for the time and date where the warrant has been executed, an inventory of items recovered etc… Those are clearly meant to be filled out when you have recovered items in the past which means after the warrant has already been issued.
January 24, 2012, 5:50 pmNickM says:
They’re all pit bulls, even the small fluffy white ones.
Nick
January 24, 2012, 6:43 pmJoeJP says:
Mad Libs for legal geeks.
January 24, 2012, 7:32 pmLarryA says:
Fill out first page. Print Page 1. Serve warrant. Fill out second page. Print Page 2. Return to magistrate.
Several years ago one of our newer district judges hosted a social event for a local non-profit. He sent out invitations that looked like subpoenas, all in good fun. Apparently several of the recipients, or family members who checked the mail box, suffered heart palpitations and generally got the vapors before they figured out the “joke.” The experiment has not been replicated.
January 24, 2012, 8:07 pmMad Libs says:
You can see the whole set (at least the ones Google has found) here:
http://www.google.com/search?q=inurl%3Auscourts.gov%2Fuscourts%2FFormsAndFees%2FForms
Some other good ones useful for inducing heart attacks in students, friends and colleagues:
Arrest Warrant [PDF]
Arrest Warrant for a Material Witness [PDF]
Criminal Complaint [PDF]
Application for a Tracking Warrant (now US v. Jones compliant) [PDF]
Subpoena to Appear and Testify at a Hearing or Trial in a Civil Action [PDF]
Subpoena to Testify Before a Grand Jury [PDF]
January 24, 2012, 10:34 pmD.O. says:
Prof. Kerr probably can come up with a standard 4th am. claim of exclusion of evidence, complete with citations and explication of various doctrins, where the party should just substitute facts of the case in the appropriate blanks.
January 25, 2012, 1:41 amErik says:
Well, this has to be filled out by police officers, so they want it to be as easy to follow as possible. If the general public had to deal with it, I’m sure it would be worse.
January 25, 2012, 8:25 amMarc Garber says:
Orin:
Any need to attach a list of, say, the names of patients if the body of A093 says “the following patients:” . . . but with no mention of any list?
Hope all’s well your way.
January 25, 2012, 11:14 amloki13 says:
Prof. Kerr does mainly appellate work, so I doubt he has one handy. Any attorney who has done criminal trial litigation, otoh, does have one that he has used many times.
If it makes you feel better, judges’ chambers also have a form for dismissing those motions, with appropriate citations. They get a lot of use. ;)
January 26, 2012, 7:47 amzippypinhead says:
Methinks Professor Kerr may be subtly suggesting that, notwithstanding various “open government” movements, some forms simply shouldn’t be made available for every jokester in the world on the public uscourts.gov website?
FWIW: This form is most commonly printed double-sided on one piece of paper, which is an artifact of how GPO produced them in hard copy format in the not-distant past (and if you’re a real old-timer, you may even remember the carbon copy triplicate version). Post-search, agents fill in the back side of the return copy by hand or using an ancient device still sometimes seen on TV cop show reruns, called a “typewriter.”
January 26, 2012, 6:16 pmCarl N. Brown says:
I guess possessing those forms for educational purposes is not a malum prohibitum, but wouldn’t actually using them (even as a gag) without authority be some sort of malum in se?
January 27, 2012, 9:06 am