Defendant\u2019s unsupported testimony that the search warrant does not appear to have a judge\u2019s original signature on it fails in the face of testimony from the officer that he saw the judge sign it. The fact it took 120 days to complete the forensic investigation of the seized hard drives isn\u2019t worthy of suppression where the warrant didn\u2019t specify a time. Failure to return property doesn\u2019t require suppression either. United States v. Gibson, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58133 (D.Nev. Jan. 11, 2017), adopted, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58136 (D. Nev. April 14, 2017).* [Note: I have seen what appears to be digital pdf signatures inserted into warrants. If the warrant is being transmitted by email and the judge did it or caused it to be done, having read the affidavit and warrant, a pdf signature is not a constitutional violation.]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Defendant\u2019s unsupported testimony that the search warrant does not appear to have a judge\u2019s original signature on it fails in the face of testimony from the officer that he saw the judge sign it. The fact it took 120 days … Continue reading