Utah Court Rules – Published for Comment
The Supreme Court and Judicial Council invite comments about amending these rules. To view the proposed amendment, click on the rule number.
To submit a comment or view the comments of others, click on “Continue Reading.” To submit a comment, scroll down to the “Leave a Reply” section, and type your comment in the “Comment” field. Type your name and email address in the designated fields and click “Post Comment.”
Comments cannot be acknowledged, but all will be considered. Comments are saved to a buffer for review before publication.
Posted: January 25, 2005
URCrP 40. Remotely communicated search warrants. New. Establishes procedures for obtaining a search warrant other than personally before the magistrate. Effective May 2, 2005. Approved as an expedited amendment under Rule 11-101(6)(F). Subject to further change after the comment period.
URCP Rule 40(b) should require that the supporting testimony and contents of the warrant be recorded by the judicial officer. Recording by the law enforcement officer or prosecutor creates an appearance of impropriety and the opportunity for mis-conduct by an interested party. Maintenance of that record by the court is necessary to insure the integrity of court records and proceedings.
URCP Rule 40(e) should require that the warrant and the recorded testimony be filed with the Court on the next business day. Immediate filing is necessary to insure the integrity of court records and proceedings.
URCP 40 should require the judicial officer to maintain a verbatim record of the contents of the warrant as read to him/her by the requesting police officer or prosecutor. That should be filed with the clerk on the next business day.
URCP Rule 40(f) should allow access to the warrant and recorded supporting testimony by any party effected by the warrant. As written, the owner of a home which was searched but who was never criminally charged can not get a copy. Similarly, if no evidence was discovered in the search, no one can get a copy of the warrant and supporting testimony. A home owner should be entitled to know the facts which justified a search of his home regardless of whether evidence was found or criminal proceedings instituted.
# # #