Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

...ed therein--The search warrant shall in all cases be served by any of the officers mentioned in its direction, but by no other person except in aid of the officer requiring it, said officer being present and acting in its execution. 19 Fla.Stat.Ann. § 933.08 (West 1985)....

...y, Florida, or any Constable of said County: * * *", *679 [the office of Sheriff of Dade County, Florida, is non-existent having been abolished by law], the warrant was actually served by a Deputy Metropolitan Sheriff of Dade County, in violation of § 933.08, Fla....

...eriff of Dade County, the direction of the search warrant in the instant case, "To the Sheriff and/or Deputy Sheriffs of Dade County * * *", constitutes a sufficient identification of the Metropolitan Sheriff valid and within the scope and intent of § 933.08 Fla....

...the case. [1] After a hearing, the trial court denied appellant's motion to suppress in which he argued the officer who served the search warrant for the blood sample was outside his territorial jurisdiction when he did so, and thus in violation of section 933.08, Florida Statutes....

...in, observe, or supervise the search; he waited in another room while the staff searched the physician's files. He signed an inventory sheet without verifying its accuracy or determining what had been seized. The court in Morris noted that "[u]nder section 933.08, the persons authorized in a warrant to conduct a search and seize the items described must actually execute the warrant and conduct the search," 622 So.2d at 68, citing Hesselrode v....

...State, 471 So.2d 172 (Fla. 1st DCA), review denied, 479 So.2d 118 (Fla. 1985), this court held "that a stipulation voluntarily entered into by all parties that an issue preserved for appeal by a defendant's nolo contendere plea will be so considered by this court." [2] Section 933.08 provides: Search warrants to be served by officers mentioned therein....

...ssued. F.S. Section 933.07 F.S.A. fixes the judicial duty upon the judge or magistrate to examine the application "and proofs submitted" and to be satisfied that "probable cause exists for the issuing of the search warrant" before it is issued. F.S. Section 933.08 F.S.A....

...*350 The affidavit for the warrant, so issued, was executed by officers of the Longboat Key Police Department. The execution of the warrant and the ensuing search and seizure of contraband located within the described premises was conducted solely by members of the Longboat Key Police Department. Section 933.08, Florida Statutes, (1977) reads: "The search warrant shall in all cases be served by any of the officers mentioned in its direction, but by no other person except in aid of the officer requiring it, said officer being present and actin...

...relevant in determining the existence of fraud in the Medicaid program... . (Emphasis added). Hence, to examine or seize the records of a physician, the government must secure a search warrant or utilize other lawful process. As to search warrants, section 933.08, Florida Statutes (1991) provides: Search warrants to be served by officers mentioned therein....

...uthorizing searches and seizures should be strictly construed, and the issuance of search warrants and searches conducted pursuant thereto must strictly conform to such statutory provisions. State v. Tolmie, 421 So.2d 1087 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982). Under section 933.08, the persons authorized in a warrant to conduct a search and seize the items described must actually execute the warrant and conduct the search....

...Initially, we do not believe that section 409.920(10)(a), and its exclusion of a physician's premises from inspections by the Auditor General, was intended to bar the Auditor General from assisting an authorized police agency in executing a warrant. Under section 933.08, the assistance of civilians is expressly permitted if the law enforcement officers specified in the warrant need aid, provided, "said officer being present and acting in its [the warrant's] execution." However, the officer designated...

...by the officer authorized to conduct the search. In short, the current case is not one of aiding the officer authorized to conduct the search, but rather displacing that officer. In our view, this displacement is not authorized by the provisions of section 933.08....

...It is not enough that the authorized officer wait in another room while the search is conducted by others. It is not by accident that the statute limits the execution of a search warrant to the police officials designated in the warrant. This is the essential purpose of section 933.08....

...In other words, it is of great importance that the police authorized to conduct the search do so. They are especially charged and trained to see that the search is carried out properly, lawfully, and in accord with the provisions of the warrant. There is no provision in section 933.08 nor anywhere else that would permit this responsibility to be delegated to an unauthorized person....

...The State stipulated that the motion to suppress was dispositive of the entire case. The district court affirmed the trial court and certified the aforementioned question on the validity of the execution of this search warrant. *177 The execution of warrants in Florida is governed in relevant part by section 933.08 of the Florida Statutes, which reads: The search warrant shall in all cases be served by any of the officers mentioned in its direction, but by no other person except in aid of the officer requiring it, said officer being present and acting in its execution. § 933.08, Fla....

...ion 12, Florida Constitution, or the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. It is strictly a question of compliance with the statutory requirements for executing a search warrant. The critical issue emphasized by the majority is whether section 933.08, Florida Statutes (1993), requires an authorized officer to actually observe a medical procedure in order to be considered present....

...of six months to four years for each offense, with the sentences to run concurrently, appellant brought this appeal. Appellant first contends that the search warrant was served by an officer who was not authorized to execute it in violation of F.S. § 933.08 F.S.A....

...2d DCA 1985) ("affidavits and warrants must meticulously conform to statutory and constitutional provisions."); cf. State v. Vargas, 667 So.2d 175, 176-77 (Fla.1995) (suppressing evidence where warrant was served by an officer not named in the warrant, in violation of section 933.08, Florida Statutes)....

...property described in the warrant or the person named, for the property specified, and to bring the property and any person arrested in connection therewith before the judge or some other court having jurisdiction of the offense. Additionally, section 933.08, Florida Statutes, states: “The search warrant shall in all cases be served by any of the officers mentioned in its direction, but by no other person except in aid of the officer requiring it, said officer being present and acting in...

...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....

...The fact that a City of Cocoa police officer was present and assisted in serving the warrant does not make the service good, because the warrant did not authorize that officer to serve it, although it could have and it is difficult to understand why it did not. See § 933.08; Hesselrode v....

...o search the property described in the warrant or the person named, for the property specified, and to bring the property and any person arrested in connection therewith before the magistrate or some other court having jurisdiction of the offense. . Section 933.08 provides: Search warrants to be served by officers mentioned therein....

...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. *1233 There is another reason why the court should have granted the motion to suppress. Section 933.08, Florida Statutes (1979), requires that one of the officers mentioned in the warrant’s direction serve the warrant....

...plicate “shall be delivered to the officer with the original warrant, and when the officer serves the warrant, he shall deliver a copy to the person named in the warrant, or in his absence to some person in charge of, or living on the premises.” Section 933.08, Florida Statutes (1981), further provides that a search warrant “shall in all cases be served by any of the officers mentioned in its direction, but by no other person except in aid of the officer requiring it, said officer being pr...

...Even though he was not the one who caused it to be issued, he was one of the class identified in the warrant and, therefore, it was validly executed. Byers v. State, 109 So.2d 382 (Fla. 2d D.C.A. 1959); Sharon v. State, 156 So.2d 677 (Fla. 3d D.C.A. 1963); Nofs v. State, 295 So.2d 308 (Fla. 2d D.C.A. 1974); Section 933.08, Florida Statutes (1975)....

...hernalia. The resultant search was executed by a Bay County deputy sheriff and members of the Lynn Haven Police Department. Appellants moved to suppress all statements, evidence, and fruits of the search, contending that the search was invalid under section 933.08, Florida Statutes (1991), because the sheriff was not present and did not direct any officers during the search. Section 933.08, Florida Statutes (1991), requires that search warrants be served by an officer named therein, but by no other person except in aid of that officer, said officer being present and acting in its execution....

...Differentiating between sheriffs and deputy sheriffs in this context would amount to a distinction without a difference and lead to an absurd result. See Sharon v. State, 156 So.2d 677 (Fla.3d DCA 1963) (affirming denial of suppression motion under section 933.08 where search warrant directed to defunct sheriffs office was executed by successor metropolitan sheriffs office; refusing to lend credence to such a “distinction without a difference” in order to avoid absurd result). Reading sectioná 933.08, 30.07, and 30.-15(1)(b) in pari materia, deputy sheriffs are statutorily equated to sheriffs and may execute search warrants in their stead....

...re the search is conducted prior to physical possession of executed warrants or where the search is not conducted by the officer named in the warrants. See State v. Vargas, 667 So.2d 175 (Fla.1996); Morris v. State, 622 So.2d 67 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993); § 933.08, Fla....

...On appeal, the state argues that even after the trial court excised the information from the affidavits, probable cause existed for the search warrants. However, the trial court did not base its suppression order exclusively on the lack of probable cause, but also on the improper execution. Section 933.08, Florida Statutes, provides: The search warrant shall in all cases be served by any of the officers mentioned in its direction, but by no other person except in aid of the officer requiring it, said officer being present and acting in its execution....

...warrant was executed by an unauthorized officer). Here, both warrants directed Bradford and Williams to perform the search. However, other, unauthorized, officers executed the search warrants. Because both search warrants were served in violation of section 933.08, Florida Statutes, applying Vargas and Morris, the motion to suppress was properly granted....