Search warrant not in hand is not a Fourth Amendment violation

Failure to have a search warrant in hand is not a Fourth Amendment violation as long as its terms are complied with. State v. Wilson, 984 So. 2d 870 (La. App. 5th Cir. 2008):

The Fourth Amendment does not require that the accused be served with a copy of the search warrant before the search and seizure occurs. See Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 355 n.16, 88 S.Ct. 507, 514, 19 L.Ed.2d 576 (1967); United States v. Bonner, 808 F.2d 864, 869 (1st Cir. 1986), cert. denied, 481 U.S. 1006, 107 S.Ct. 1632, 95 L.Ed.2d 205 (1987); United States v. Woodring, 444 F.2d 749, 751 (9th Cir. 1971).

Protective search of defendant’s gym bag in vehicle during traffic stop was justified by officer safety. McDowell v. State, 179 Md. App. 666, 947 A.2d 582 (2008):

The search of the gym bag during Trooper Gussoni’s roadside traffic stop clearly falls within the parameters of Long. Accordingly, we must consider “whether a reasonably prudent man in the circumstances would be warranted in the belief that his safety or that of others was in danger.” Long, 463 U.S. at 1050 (internal quotation omitted). Under Long, “[t]o engage in an area search, which is limited to seeking weapons, the officer must have an articulable suspicion that the suspect is potentially dangerous.” Id. at 1052 n.16.