{"id":24463,"date":"2016-11-18T14:52:03","date_gmt":"2016-11-18T19:52:03","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=24463"},"modified":"2016-11-18T14:52:03","modified_gmt":"2016-11-18T19:52:03","slug":"w-d-n-y-when-a-state-search-warrant-is-used-in-federal-court-state-officers-retain-the-evidence-pending-trial","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=24463","title":{"rendered":"W.D.N.Y.: When a state search warrant is used in federal court, state officers retain the evidence pending trial"},"content":{"rendered":"

Suspected explosives shipped to defendant\u2019s address and search finding them in the garage didn\u2019t preclude searching the house as well since the package was shipped to defendant\u2019s home. Because a state search warrant was executed, state officers were charged with custody under state law. \u201cThe electronic devices seized during the execution of the state search warrant likely would have fallen to the state court’s legal custody under CPL \u00a7 690.55. As far as the Court can tell from the record, the ATF never requested a transfer order from the state court before acquiring the electronic devices. Paying closer attention to the requirements under CPL \u00a7 690.55 is the better practice, and the Court might need to take a closer look at the issue during future warrant applications. Nonetheless, and following Mizrahi, raising CPL \u00a7 690.55 to the level of a safeguard of substantive rights seems like too much of a stretch without further legislative or appellate guidance as to that statute’s policy objective. See also Virginia v. Moore, 553 U.S. 164, 178 (2008) (\u2018[I]t is not the province of the Fourth Amendment to enforce state law.\u2019).\u201d United States v. O’Neill, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 159481 (W.D.N.Y. Nov. 17, 2016). See also CA6: Rule 41(g) motion for return of property doesn\u2019t lie in federal court when state officers seized, even in a federal prosecution<\/a> posted 11\/16.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Suspected explosives shipped to defendant\u2019s address and search finding them in the garage didn\u2019t preclude searching the house as well since the package was shipped to defendant\u2019s home. Because a state search warrant was executed, state officers were charged with … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-24463","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24463","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=24463"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24463\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":24464,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24463\/revisions\/24464"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=24463"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=24463"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=24463"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}