Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

...ere found. Defendant's primary contention is that the seizure of the items of clothing went beyond the scope of the search warrant. Relying on the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, Fla. Const., art. I, § 12, F.S.A., and Fla. Stat. § 933.07, F.S.A., defendant argues that each of these requires that warrants particularly describe the items to be seized; also, that Fla....

...xecute process,” and may be made returnable before the magistrate issuing it, “or some other court having jurisdiction of the offense.” Section 993.07 F. S. 1941. The Circuit Judge, in his opinion, lays emphasis on the *356 last clause of this Section 933.07, above quoted, and also upon Section 901.01, F....

...F.S. Section 933.06 F.S.A. requires sworn affidavits and possibly "further testimony" tending to "establish the grounds of the application or probable cause for believing that they exist" to the judge or magistrate before the warrant is issued. F.S. Section 933.07 F.S.A....

...its, or depositions in writing, to support the application. The affidavit and further proof, if same be had or required, must set forth the facts tending to establish the grounds of the application or probable cause for believing that they exist.” Section 933.07 Florida Statutes 1941 provides that “The judge or magistrate, upon examination of the application and proofs submitted, if satisfied that probable cause exists for the issuing of the search warrant, *858 shall thereupon issue a searc...

...d Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and article I, section 9 of the Florida Constitution. See Fla. Dep't of Agric. & Consumer Servs. v. Haire, 836 So.2d 1040, 1060 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). The Fourth District further concluded that section 933.07(2), Florida Statutes (2003), which authorizes county-wide search warrants, was unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and article 1, section 12 of the Florida Constitution....

...However, the Fourth District determined that there was no Fourth Amendment violation in the inclusion of multiple properties in a single affidavit and search warrant, and in the magistrate's use of an electronic signature. See id. Although the State does not appeal the determination that section 933.07(2) is unconstitutional, the petitioners, who own citrus trees that have been destroyed or are targeted for destruction, contend that the *778 Citrus Canker Law is unconstitutional because it allows for the destruction of private proper...

...We are of the opinion that the factual recitation in this warrant is sufficient to show probable cause. It is next argued by petitioner that the search warrant must contain a command that the search be made forthwith. This contention is based upon F.S. § 933.07, F.S.A....

...r, violates substantive and procedural due process; (2) whether the Department has the authority to conduct warrantless searches of residential private property; (3) if search warrants are required, whether area-wide search warrants authorized under section 933.07(2), Florida Statutes (2002), are unconstitutional; and (4) if area-wide search warrants are unconstitutional, whether individual search warrants each supported by a separate affidavit of probable cause and signed by a neutral magistrate, without the use of an electronic signature, are mandated. We hold that section 581.184 does not violate due process and is therefore constitutional, but that section 933.07(2) does violate the Fourth Amendment....

...just compensation, and permits unreasonable searches and seizures. Appellees moved for a temporary injunction, which the trial court granted after an extensive hearing. In its order, the court made the following conclusions: 1) sections 581.184 and 933.07 are unconstitutional because they violate Article I, Section 12 of the Florida Constitution and the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution; 2) the scientific principles upon which section 581.184 is founded are unsound and do not p...

...ute does not violate procedural due process. Necessity and Procedure for Obtaining Search Warrants The trial court made several rulings with respect to the Department's ability to search private backyards to inspect for citrus canker. The court held section 933.07(2) unconstitutional....

...The Department challenges these various orders. First, it claims a search warrant *1055 is not required, because these searches were conducted pursuant to the "exigent circumstances" exception to the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment. Second, it contends that section 933.07(2) authorizes area-wide administrative search warrants....

...We hold the exigent circumstances exception does not excuse the Department from obtaining a warrant to search constitutionally protected property. [8] Furthermore, the Legislature itself appears to have concluded that warrants should be required for administrative searches because it enacted section 933.07(2), authorizing area-wide search warrants....

...In order to conduct administrative inspections of appellees' property without their consent, the Department is required to obtain search warrants in conformance with the Fourth Amendment and Article I, Section 12, of the Florida Constitution. We hold that section 933.07(2), providing for area-wide warrants, is unconstitutional and a violation of the Fourth Amendment....

...law do not apply here. Instead, the Legislature adopted a per-tree compensation allotment for destroyed trees. See § 581.1845. [6] The order actually states that section 933.02 is declared unconstitutional, but the rationale in the order applies to section 933.07(2)....

...ces from four different physicians within a five-month period. Police then began investigating whether petitioner should be charged with violating the "doctor shopping" statute. [1] *390 Police prepared an affidavit and obtained search warrants. See § 933.07(1), Fla....

...Section 933.02(3) expresses no limitations as to the kind of property that may be had by a search warrant. To the contrary, section 933.02(3)'s term any property self-evidently includes medical records because of the absence of any limiting text. And the presence of one actual limitation in subsection (2) of 933.07(1) demonstrates beyond any quibble that when the Legislature proposes to restrict search warrants as to specified property it will say so in the statute....

...the writ for failure to show irreparable harm. Nevertheless, despite our conclusion that the state has failed to show irreparable harm in this case, holding an adversarial hearing prior to the issuance of a search warrant is contrary to statute. See § 933.07, Fla....

...t of privacy does not further restrict the State's powers of search and seizure in the criminal context beyond those requirements imposed by article I, section 12, and the Fourth Amendment. We know from the addition of the citrus canker provision to section 933.07(2) that the Legislature is aware of its authority to add burdens in obtaining search warrants....

...Unlike the majority, I see a distinction between the right to search and seize medical records, which is controlled by article I, section 12 of the Florida Constitution and "disclosure" of those records, which I believe is controlled by section 23. With regard to search and seizure, section 933.07(1), Florida Statutes (2003), authorizes the search of property or persons described for the purpose of bringing the property or person(s) before a magistrate or other court....

...rant statute to require the court to "conduct a court proceeding prior to the issuance of such search warrant upon reasonable notice" and to "receive, hear, and determine any objections by property owners to the issuance of such search warrant." See § 933.07(2), Fla....

...g such records."). [hereinafter referred to as subpoena statutes] [8] And so, when we refer to the medical records subpoena statutes, or just the subpoena statutes, we refer only to the subdivisions dealing with subpoenas of medical records. [9] See § 933.07(1), Fla....

...(1979), authorizes a search warrant for an occupied private dwelling when the law relating to narcotics or drug abuse is being violated therein. [2] Section 933.05, Florida Statutes (1979), requires the warrant to name or describe "the person, place or thing to be searched... ." Section 933.07, Florida Statutes (1979), provides the warrant is "to search the property described in the warrant or the person named......

...rlying facts. The anonymity of the informant can still be protected; [4] and I do not construe *173 § 933.06, F.S.A. as making it incumbent on the issuing magistrate to reduce such testimony to writing if it is cumulative to the affiant's, nor does § 933.07, F.S.A....

...They of course were authorized, as well, to seize, as in plain sight, the drug scales and the sawed-off shotgun. But the systematic search of the attic, the opening and rummaging of the desk drawers and the confiscation of their contents simply was not authorized by the Constitution or by the warrant which, pursuant to § 933.07, F.S....

...Defendant also argues that the search warrant was not authorized by chapter 933, Florida Statutes (1985), because a warrant is authorized only for the seizure of property or things, not of a person. However, chapter 933 specifically contemplates searches of persons. See §§ 933.04, 933.07. Section 933.07 provides for warrants "to search ......

...The search warrant described with reasonable sufficiency the place to be searched. Appellant's final contention is that the motion to suppress should have been granted because the evidence obtained under the search warrant was not properly returned to the court, as provided by F.S. § 933.07, F.S.A....

...is space. The record further reveals that this "true copy" was the document in possession of the officer when the warrant was executed and that a second photocopy unsigned at any place, was delivered to appellant during the execution of the warrant. Section 933.07, F.S....

...While it may be argued that the omission to issue a duplicate copy or the failure to serve an unsigned duplicate on the person in charge of the premises to be searched may not be fatal, [1] we are of the view that the failure of the issuing magistrate to sign an original warrant pursuant to § 933.07, supra, is....

...ounce" rule. The trial court's denial of the defendant's motion to suppress on this basis was therefore correct. We now consider appellant's allegation that the affidavit upon which the search warrant was issued failed to demonstrate probable cause. Section 933.07, Florida Statutes (1985), requires a finding of probable cause before a judge can issue a search warrant....

...e by failing to contain the command that the person executing the warrant bring the property found and the person in possession thereof before the magistrate issuing the warrant or some other court having jurisdiction of the offense as prescribed by Section 933.07, Florida Statutes, F.S.A....

...on found violating the law in connection with the same, and to bring them before `the County Court of the 15th Judicial Circuit, Criminal Division' or before any other Court having jurisdiction of the offense, to be dealt with according to law... ." Section 933.07, Florida Statutes (1973), states that search warrants shall command the searching officer to bring any seized property before the magistrate or some other court having jurisdiction of the offense....

...seizure. In light of these purposes for controlling post-seizure conduct, we conclude that substantial compliance is sufficient where no prejudice is shown. [7] The language of the warrant in this case substantially complied with the requirement of Section 933.07, Florida Statutes (1973)....

...search warrants apply regardless of who signs the application.” Id. Unlike the statutes that state who may be an affiant to a search warrant, the statutes that govern the execution of a search warrant provide that only law enforcement officers may execute a search warrant. Section 933.07(1), Florida Statutes, provides: The judge, upon examination of the application and proofs submitted, if satisfied that probable cause exists for the issuing of the search warrant, shall thereupon issue a search...

...The trial court found the search invalid because the warrant was not properly served, and suppressed the evidence. The State concedes that statutes authorizing searches and seizures must be strictly construed, State ex rel. Wilson v. Quigg, 154 Fla. 348 , 17 So.2d 697 (1944), but argues that sections 933.07 1 and 933.08, 2 Florida Statutes (1985) authorize a municipal officer named in a search warrant to execute the warrant outside the territorial limits of his municipality. We cannot agree. It is true that section 933.07 authorizes a judge to issue a search warrant to “any police officer.” However, with certain limited exceptions not applicable here, a municipal police officer has no power to act as a police officer outside the territorial limits of his municipality....

...hough it could have and it is difficult to understand why it did not. See § 933.08; Hesselrode v. State, 369 So.2d 348 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979), cert. denied, 381 So.2d 766 (Fla.1980). The order appealed from is AFFIRMED. DAUKSCH and COBB, JJ., concur. . Section 933.07 provides: Issuance of search warrants....

...ch warrant, concluded that the search warrant was defective on its face because it "failed to contain a command that the person executing such search warrant bring the person in possession thereof (jewelry) before the magistrate ... as prescribed by Section 933.07 of the Florida Statutes, F.S.A., ...". [1] The lower court based its determination largely upon the recent decision of the First District in State v. Dawson, Fla.App. 1973, 276 So.2d 65. *261 Section 933.07, in authorizing the issuance of search warrants, provides as follows: "933.07 Issuance of search warrants The judge or magistrate, upon examination of the application and proofs submitted, if satisfied that probable cause exists for the issuing of the search warrant, shall thereupon issue a search warrant signed by him...

...in the warrant" (premises) since that phrase is in the disjunctive. Clearly this would be an absurd interpretation. Unquestionably, a search warrant must conform strictly to the statutory provisions authorizing its issuance. A strict construction of Section 933.07 and a strict conformity thereto suggests that it is only the "property specified" (evidence of crime) that is required to be brought before the committing magistrate. Any other construction would not only be unreasonable but would necessitate the judicial revision of Section 933.07. We are not unmindful of the decision of our sister court in State v. Dawson relied upon below by the trial court. [2] In our view, the decision in Dawson is inconsistent with the clear pronouncement of Section 933.07....

...ho issued the warrant." The very purpose of a search warrant is to sanction an invasion of one's person or property (which otherwise might be unlawful) to discover and take into legal custody matters that constitute evidence of crime. In our opinion Section 933.07 does not require that the search *262 warrant contain a command to bring before the committing magistrate the person in possession of the property to be seized....

...NOTES [1] The warrant also commanded the owner of the stolen property to be brought before the proper authority to identify said property. The inclusion of this command in the search warrant while neither authorized nor required under the language of Sec. 933.07, does not render the search warrant defective inasmuch as this language may be treated as surplusage....

...McGuire, 670 So.2d 153, 156 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). Nevertheless, despite our conclusion that the state has failed to show irreparable harm in this case, holding an adversarial hearing prior to the issuance of a search warrant is contrary to statute. See § 933.07, Fla....

...Pre-seizure hearings are "necessarily ex parte, since the subject of the search cannot be tipped off to the application for a warrant lest he destroy or remove evidence." Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154, 169, 98 S.Ct. 2674, 2683, 57 L.Ed.2d 667 (1978). The issuance of search warrants is governed by section 933.07, Florida Statutes (1997), which provides: [t]he judge, upon examination of the application and proofs submitted, if satisfied that probable cause exists for the issuing of the search warrant, shall thereupon issue a search warrant ......

...State, 803 So.2d 598, 605 (Fla.2001); State v. McCabe, 845 So.2d 327, 328 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)). Before issuing a search warrant for a home, the magistrate must examine the supporting affidavit and determine whether probable cause justifies the search warrant. U.S. Const. amend. IV; § 933.07(1), Fla....

...teenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and article I, section 9 of the Florida Constitution. See Fla. Dep’t of Agric. & Consumer Servs. v. Haire, 836 So.2d 1040, 1060 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). The Fourth District further concluded that section 933.07(2), Florida Statutes (2003), which authorizes county-wide search warrants, was unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and article 1, section 12 of the Florida Constitution....

...However, the Fourth District determined that there was no Fourth Amendment violation in the inclusion of multiple properties in a single affidavit and search warrant, and in the magistrate’s use of an electronic signature. See id. Although the State does not appeal the determination that section 933.07(2) is unconstitutional, the petitioners, who own citrus trees that have been destroyed or are targeted for destruction, contend that the *778 Citrus Canker Law is unconstitutional because it allows for the destruction of private proper...

...Appellant claims that the court erred: "in denying defendant's motion to suppress evidence where evidence was seized pursuant to the execution of a search warrant and where said search warrant failed to command the executing officer, pursuant to F.S. 933.07 to return the seized property before the judge who signed the warrant." We agree and reverse....

...w in connection with the same, and to bring them before `the County Court of the 15th Judicial Circuit, Criminal Division' or before any other Court having jurisdiction of the offense, to be dealt with according to law... ." (emphasis supplied) F.S. § 933.07 (1973) provides: "......

...ve. It is evident that the noun "same" was used to refer to the things seized, and the pronoun "them" was used to refer to persons apprehended. The state has urged that the phrase, "to be disposed of according to law" satisfies the requirements of F.S. 933.07 by implication....

...1974) that a failure to command return of the person in possession was not error, but that failure to command return of the property seized would be. "Unquestionably, a search warrant must conform strictly to the statutory provisions authorizing its issuance. A strict construction of Section 933.07 ....

...We construe that portion of the Governor’s Executive Order which authorizes the investigation of the “misconduct” of public officials to mean those acts of misconduct which violate the criminal laws of the state. The Governor has no power under the Act to direct an investigation of lesser forms of misconduct. . See § 933.07, Fla.Stat....

...fective and incapable of proper execution. The court denied the motion, and appellant pled nolo contendere, reserving the right to appeal the denial of his motion. We conclude the court erred in not suppressing the evidence seized under the warrant. Section 933.07, Florida Statutes (1979), governs the issuance of a search warrant....

...HE STATE OF FLORIDA TO.” Presumably, through oversight, nothing was typed after these words. The effect was that no person or group of persons were directed by the issuing judge to execute the warrant. Consequently, the warrant did not comply with section 933.07....

...The defective warrant here is more like the warrant considered in Martin v. State, 344 So.2d 248 (Fla.2d DCA 1976). In that case we noted that the failure of the issuing magistrate to sign the original of the search warrant was a fatal defect. The court reasoned that section 933.07 mandated the signing of the warrant and that strict compliance with that statute was required....

...If service of a warrant by one not specified in the direction is not legal, when no one is designated to serve the warrant, its execution becomes impossible. The fact that the deputy who served the search warrant was among that class of persons authorized by section 933.07 to be directed to do so is irrelevant because there was no direction whatsoever....

...Specifically the defendants assert the affidavit lacks any notary seal, court seal or other indication of authorization of the person before whom it was suppos *669 edly sworn. Similarly, they contend the failure of Judge Knowles to affix a seal or the name of her office to the search warrant pursuant to § 933.07, Fla.Stat....

...motion to suppress. The motion to suppress alleged that the search warrant was defective on its face because it did not contain a command that the property to be seized be brought before a court having jurisdiction of the offense as required by F.S. § 933.07....

...Dawson, 276 So.2d 65 (Fla.App. 1st, 1973) held that the phrase “to be disposed of according to law” in a search warrant commanding an *797 officer to keep seized property in their possession, does not satisfy by implication the mandate of F.S. § 933.07, requiring that the property be brought before the magistrate....

...*529 The search warrant commanded the officer serving the same to search the premises described in the warrant and to bring all tax paid intoxicating beverages found thereon, and the person found in possession thereof, “before the Court having jurisdiction”. The search warrant statute, F.S. § 933.07, F.S.A., requires that the search warrant command the officer serving the same to search the property described therein, and if the articles specified in the warrant be found, to bring the same and the person found in possession thereof “...

...That case, relying upon the prior decision of this Court in State v. Dawson, 276 So.2d 65 (Fla.App. 1st, 1973) held that the phrase “[to] be disposed of according to law” in a search warrant commanding an officer to keep seized property in their possession, does not satisfy by implication the mandate of F.S. § 933.07, requiring that the property be brought before the magistrate....