NY State Senate Bill 2009-S2594

Senate Bill S2594

2009-2010 Legislative Session

Relates to the execution of a warrant of arrest and establishes educational programs for judicial personnel on the law of searches, arrests and seizures

download bill text pdf

Archive: Last Bill Status - In Senate Committee Codes Committee

Introduced
- In Committee Assembly
- In Committee Senate
- On Floor Calendar Assembly
- On Floor Calendar Senate
- Passed Assembly
- Passed Senate
Delivered to Governor
Signed By Governor

Please enter your contact information

First Name

Last Name

Email Address

A valid email address is required.

Home address is used to determine the senate district in which you reside. Your support or opposition to this bill is then shared immediately with the senator who represents you.

Optional services from the NY State Senate:

Create an account. An account allows you to officially support or oppose key legislation, sign petitions with a single click, and follow issues, committees, and bills that matter to you. When you create an account, you agree to this platform's terms of participation.

Include a custom message for your Senator? (Optional)

Enter a message to your senator. Many New Yorkers use this to share the reasoning behind their support or opposition to the bill. Others might share a personal anecdote about how the bill would affect them or people they care about.

Actions

View Actions

	Assembly Actions - Lowercase Senate Actions - UPPERCASE
Jan 06, 2010	referred to codes
May 21, 2009	print number 2594a
May 21, 2009	amend and recommit to codes
Feb 25, 2009	referred to codes

Bill Amendments

Original

A (Active)

2009-S2594 - Details

Current Committee:: Senate Codes
Versions Introduced in Other Legislative Sessions:: 2011-2012: S3606
2013-2014: S1278
2015-2016: S4354
2017-2018: S2658
2019-2020: S8517

2009-S2594 - Summary

Makes various provisions to the criminal procedure law in relation to the execution of a warrant of arrest; authorizes the commissioner of the division of criminal justice services to establish a system to record and monitor the issuance and execution of search warrants; and authorizes the chief administrator of the court system to establish educational programs for judicial personnel on the law of searches, arrests and seizures.

2009-S2594 - Sponsor Memo

                                 BILL NUMBER:  S2594

 TITLE OF BILL :
An act to amend the criminal procedure law, in relation to the
execution of a warrant of arrest; to amend the executive law, in
relation to authorizing the commissioner of the division of criminal
justice services to establish a system to record and monitor the
issuance and execution of search warrants; and to amend the judiciary
law, in relation to authorizing the chief administrator to establish
educational programs for judicial personnel on the law of searches,
arrests and seizures

 PURPOSE :
The bill amends the Criminal Procedure Law ("CPL"), the Executive Law
and Judiciary Law to better protect the public from possible
individual or systemic abuse of so-called "no-knock" search warrants,
while preserving the use of such warrants as a valuable tool of law
enforcement.

 SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS :
Section 1 amends §690.30 of the CPL so that, in the absence of facts
in an application for a warrant and findings by a court supporting the
execution of a no-knock warrant at some other time, no-knock warrants
are to be executed between the hours of 9:00 A.M. and 6:00P.M.

Section 2 amends §690.35 of the CPL to require that the application

for a no-knock warrant be made between 6:00 A.M.  and 9:00 P.M.,
unless circumstances reasonably require that the application be made
at some other time, in which event the application must set forth
those circumstances.

Section 3 amends §690.35 of the CPL to require the applicant for a
no-knock search warrant to reasonably ascertain whether persons other
than the subject of the warrant will be present when the warrant is to
be executed and to consider reasonable alternatives to executing the
warrant in the presence of such individuals.

Section 4 amends §690.40 of the CPL to require a court entertaining an
application for a no-knock warrant to place its findings on the
record, either in writing or orally, or in writing upon the
application for the warrant.

Section 5 amends §690.45 of the CPL to provide that a warrant for a
no-knock search reflect the timing requirements in § 1 of the bill.

Section 6 amends §690.50 of the CPL to require that in addition to
filing a return on a search warrant, that the applicant for the
warrant complete a form prepared by the Division of Criminal Justice
Services ("DCJS") that includes information on the execution and scope
of the warrant.

Section 7 amends §690.60 of the CPL to require monetary compensation
by the state or municipality employing the officials that execute a
no-knock search warrant for property damaged or destroyed during the
execution of such a warrant unless the owner of the property has been
convicted of a crime involving or relating to the property seized.

Section 8 amends the Executive Law by adding a new §837-r to require
DCJS: 1) to develop a form to be used by law enforcement to facilitate
the reporting requirement established in §6 of the bill; and 2) to
collect, process and analyze the information collected from such forms
every year (which each court that issues a warrant must file on a
yearly basis), the results of which are to be provided to the Attorney
General/the Office of Court Administration, law enforcement agencies
and civilian complaint review boards.

Section 9 amends §212 of the Judiciary Law by mandating regular
training of judicial personnel in the substantive law of search and
seizures.

Section 10 provides for an effective date of November 1, 2003.

 JUSTIFICATION :
The tragic circumstances surrounding the death of Ms. Alberta Spruill
in New York City on May 16, 2003, during the ,execution of a
"no-knock" search warrant (an extraordinary form of search warrant
that police officers may execute without announcing their identity or
intentions, pursuant to the Criminal Procedure Law), have served to
highlight the dangers associated with this potent tool. Ms. Spruill, a
57-year-old woman charged with no crime, was found on the floor of her
bedroom, dressed for work, after a stun grenade was detonated in her
apartment.  The New York City Chief Medical Examiner ruled her "sudden
death following police raid" a homicide. (New York City Police
Department Report, dated May 30, 2003 ("NYPD Report"), page 3)
Subsequently, the New York City police Department conducted an
investigation and issued a report that "found deficiencies in the
procedures and practices of the overall warrant process" (NYPD Report,
p. 1) and made several recommendations.

Among those was a recommendation that there be established a central
repository of search warrants so that all search warrants could be
tracked from the time they were issued until the time they were
executed. This particular suggestion had been considered at least as
far back as January, 2003. (NYPD Press Release No. 2003-048). In
general, the report recommended "clear accountability" (NYPD Report,
p. 21) for the search warrant process. Everyone acknowledges that
no-knock search warrants are an exceptional tool that, by statute and
constitutional mandate, may only be issued under exceptional
circumstances. This bill recognizes their value in keeping our streets
safe and protecting our police officers on the front line in the
battle against crime, thus it does not change the standard of proof
for their issuance. But, as the NYPD Report noted, such warrants "need
to be sharpened in their application, not abandoned" (NYPD Report, p.
1) The legislation will greatly "sharpen" their application by
requiring with respect to no-knock warrants that: 1) an applicant
articulate clearly the reasons for seeking such a warrant; and 2) a
court articulate clearly its reasons for issuing a no-knock warrant.
Moreover, the bill establishes a data collection process that looks,
in part, to apply the NYPD model on a statewide basis. A state search
warrant database will serve not only to better inform the public and
thereby restore confidence in law enforcement, but will enable all to
see whether there have been systemic or individual abuses of search
warrants. While not barring the issuance of, or application for
no-knock warrants at any time of day or night, the bill establishes
slightly different time parameters for their execution than exist in
current law. These new time frames take into account the more profound
invasion of privacy that is associated with the use of no-knock
warrants, so that applications for their use can be evaluated more
clearly. The bill recognizes that innocent parties should not be
deprived of their property through the errors of others, so it
requires municipalities or the state, as may be appropriate, to
recompense those who are not convicted of crimes but who have their
property damaged during the execution of a no-knock warrant. It also
requires the police to assess the impact of no-knock warrants on these
same people. Finally, the judiciary, the cornerstone of the search
warrant process, must ensure that judges remain highly trained in the
law of search and seizures.  The bill mandates regular training of all
judges in this ever changing area.

 FISCAL IMPLICATION :


There are undetermined costs associated with the creation of a data
collection form and the collation of data collected from those forms
as called for in section 8 of the bill.

 PRIOR LEGISLATIVE HISTORY :
06/04/08 Referred to Rules
04/03/08 Referred to Codes
2005-06 -- A.6896
2003-04 -- A.8848A

 EFFECTIVE DATE :
One hundred eighty days after it becomes law.

2009-S2594 - Bill Text download pdf

co-Sponsors

2009-S2594A (ACTIVE) - Details

Current Committee:: Senate Codes
Versions Introduced in Other Legislative Sessions:: 2011-2012: S3606
2013-2014: S1278
2015-2016: S4354
2017-2018: S2658
2019-2020: S8517

2009-S2594A (ACTIVE) - Summary

2009-S2594A (ACTIVE) - Sponsor Memo

                                 BILL NUMBER:  S2594A

 TITLE OF BILL :
An act to amend the criminal procedure law, in relation to the
execution of a warrant of arrest; to amend the executive law, in
relation to authorizing the commissioner of the division of criminal
justice services to establish a system to record and monitor the
issuance and execution of search warrants; and to amend the judiciary
law, in relation to authorizing the chief administrator to establish
educational programs for judicial personnel on the law of searches,
arrests and seizures


 PURPOSE OR GENERAL IDEA OF BILL :
The bill amends the Criminal Procedure Law ("CPL"), the Executive Law
and Judiciary Law to better protect the public from possible
individual or systemic abuse of so-called "no-knock" search warrants,
while preserving the use of such warrants as a valuable tool of law
enforcement.

 SUMMARY OF SPECIFIC PROVISIONS :
Section 1 amends §690.30 of the CPL so that, in the absence of facts
in an application for a warrant and findings by a court supporting the
execution of a no-knock warrant at some other time, no-knock warrants
are to be executed between the hours of 9:00 A.M. and 6:00 P.M.

Section 2 amends §690.35 of the CPL to require that the application
for a no-knock warrant be made between 6:00 A.M. and 9:00 P.M., unless
circumstances reasonably require that the application be made at some
other time, in which event the application must set forth those
circumstances.

Section 3 amends §690.35 of the CPL to require the applicant for a
no-knock search warrant to reasonably ascertain whether persons other
than the subject of the warrant will be present when the warrant is to
be executed and to consider reasonable alternatives to executing the
warrant in the presence of such individuals.

Section 4 amends 5690.40 of the CPL to require a court entertaining an
application for a no-knock warrant to place its findings on the
record, either in writing or orally, or in writing upon the
application for the warrant.

Section 5 amends §690.45 of the CPL to provide that a warrant for a
no-knock search reflect the timing requirements in §1 of the bill.

Section 6 amends 5690.50 of the CPL to require that in addition to
filing a return on a search warrant, that the applicant for the
warrant complete a form prepared by the Division of Criminal Justice
Services ("DCJS") that includes information on the execution and scope
of the warrant.

Section 7 amends §690.60 of the CPL to require monetary compensation
by the state or municipality employing the officials that execute a
no-knock search warrant for property damaged or destroyed during the
execution of such a warrant unless the owner of the property has been
convicted of a crime involving or relating to the property seized.

Section 8 amends the Executive Law by adding a new §837-r to require
DCJS: 1) to develop a form to be used by law enforcement to facilitate
the reporting requirement established in §6 of the bill; and 2) to
collect, process and analyze the information collected from such forms
every year (which each court that issues a warrant must file on a
yearly basis), the results of which are to be provided to the Attorney
General, the Office of Court Administration, law enforcement agencies
and civilian complaint review boards.
Section 9 amends §212 of the Judiciary Law by mandating regular
training of judicial personnel in the substantive law of search and
seizures.

Section 10 provides for an effective date of November 1, 2003.

 JUSTIFICATION :
The tragic circumstances surrounding the death of Ms.  Alberta Spruill
in New York City on May 16, 2003, during the execution of a "no-knock"
search warrant (an extraordinary form of search warrant that police
officers may execute without announcing their identity or intentions,
pursuant to the Criminal Procedure Law), have served to highlight the
dangers associated with this potent tool. Ms.  Spruill, a 57-year-old
woman charged with no crime, was found on the floor of her bedroom,
dressed for work, after a stun grenade was detonated in her apartment.
The New York City Chief Medical Examiner ruled her "sudden death
following police raid" a homicide. (New York City police Department
Report, dated May 30, 2003 ("NYPD Report"), page 3) Subsequently, the
New York City Police Department conducted an investigation and issued
a report that "found deficiencies in the procedures and practices of
the overall warrant process" (NYPD Report, p. 1) and made several
recommendations, Among those was a recommendation that there be
established a central repository of search warrants so that all search
warrants could be tracked from the time they were issued until the
time they were executed. This particular suggestion had been
considered at least as far back as January, 2003. (NYPD Press Release
No.  2003-048). In general, the report recommended "clear
accountability" (NYPD Report, p. 21) for the search warrant process.
Everyone acknowledges that no-knock search warrants are an exceptional
tool that, by statute and constitutional mandate, may only be issued
under exceptional circumstances. This bill recognizes their value in
keeping our streets safe and protecting our police officers on the
front line in the battle against crime, thus it does not change the
standard of proof for their issuance. But, as the NYPD Report noted,
such warrants "need to be sharpened in their application, not
abandoned" (NYPD Report, p. 1). The legislation will greatly "sharpen"
their application by requiring with respect to no-knock warrants that:
1) an applicant articulate clearly the reasons for seeking such a
warrant; and 2) a court articulate clearly its reasons for issuing a
no-knock warrant. Moreover, the bill establishes a data collection
process that looks, in part, to apply the NYPD model on a statewide
basis. A state search warrant database will serve not only to better
inform the public and thereby restore confidence in law enforcement,
but will enable all to see whether there have been systemic or
individual abuses of search warrants.  While not barring the issuance
of, or application for no-knock warrants at any time of day or night,
the bill establishes slightly different time parameters for their
execution than exist in current law. These new time frames take into
account the more profound invasion of privacy that is associated with
the use of no-knock warrants, so that applications for their use can
be evaluated more clearly. The bill recognizes that innocent parties
should not be deprived of their property through the errors of others,
so it requires municipalities or the state, as may be appropriate, to
recompense those who are not convicted of crimes but who have their
property damaged during the execution of a no-knock warrant. It also
requires the police to assess the impact of no-knock warrants on these
same people. Finally, the judiciary, the cornerstone of the search
warrant process, must ensure that judges remain highly trained in the
law of search and seizures. The bill mandates regular training of all
judges in this ever changing area.

 PRIOR LEGISLATIVE HISTORY :
2007 -- A.775A 2007 -- A.775 Passed Assembly 2005-06 -- A.6696 Passed
Assembly 2003-04 -- A.8848A Passed Assembly

 FISCAL IMPLICATIONS :
There are undetermined costs associated with the creation of a data
collection form and the collation of data collected from those forms
as called for in section 8 of the bill.

 EFFECTIVE DATE :
This act shall take effect on the one hundred eightieth day after it
shall have become a law; provided, however, that effective
immediately, the addition, amendment and/or repeal of any rule or
regulation necessary for the implementation of this act on its
effective date are authorized and directed to be made and completed on
or before such effective date.

2009-S2594A (ACTIVE) - Bill Text download pdf

                            
                    S T A T E   O F   N E W   Y O R K
________________________________________________________________________

                                 2594--A

                       2009-2010 Regular Sessions

                            I N  S E N A T E

                            February 25, 2009
                               ___________

Introduced by Sens. ADAMS, KRUEGER, MONSERRATE, PARKER -- read twice and
  ordered  printed, and when printed to be committed to the Committee on
  Codes -- committee discharged,  bill  amended,  ordered  reprinted  as
  amended and recommitted to said committee

AN ACT to amend the criminal procedure law, in relation to the execution
  of  a  warrant  of  arrest; to amend the executive law, in relation to
  authorizing the commissioner  of  the  division  of  criminal  justice
  services  to establish a system to record and monitor the issuance and
  execution of search warrants; and  to  amend  the  judiciary  law,  in
  relation  to  authorizing  the chief administrator to establish educa-
  tional programs for judicial personnel on the law of searches, arrests
  and seizures

  THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND  ASSEM-
BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

  Section  1.  Subdivision 2 of section 690.30 of the criminal procedure
law is amended to read as follows:
  2.  A search warrant may be executed on any day of  the  week.    [It]
EXCEPT  AS  OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN THIS SUBDIVISION, A SEARCH WARRANT may
be executed only between the hours of 6:00 A.M. and  9:00  P.M.,  unless
the  warrant  expressly  authorizes execution thereof at any time of the
day or night, as provided in subdivision [five] SIX of section 690.45 OF
THIS ARTICLE.   NOTWITHSTANDING PARAGRAPH (A)  OF  SUBDIVISION  FOUR  OF
SECTION  690.35  OF  THIS ARTICLE, A SEARCH WARRANT BASED IN WHOLE OR IN
PART ON THE GROUNDS SET FORTH IN PARAGRAPH (B) OF  SUBDIVISION  FOUR  OF
SECTION 690.35 OF THIS ARTICLE MAY BE EXECUTED ONLY BETWEEN THE HOURS OF
9:00 A.M. AND 6:00 P.M. UNLESS THERE IS REASONABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE THAT
IT  CANNOT  BE  EXECUTED  BETWEEN  THOSE  HOURS BECAUSE (I) THE PROPERTY
SOUGHT SHALL BE REMOVED OR DESTROYED IF NOT SEIZED FORTHWITH, OR (II) IN
THE CASE OF AN APPLICATION FOR A SEARCH WARRANT AS DEFINED IN  PARAGRAPH
(B)  OF  SUBDIVISION  TWO  OF SECTION 690.05 OF THIS ARTICLE, THE PERSON
SOUGHT IS LIKELY TO FLEE OR COMMIT ANOTHER CRIME, OR  MAY  ENDANGER  THE

 EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
                      [ ] is old law to be omitted.
                                                           LBD00232-03-9

S. 2594--A                          2

SAFETY  OF THE EXECUTING POLICE OFFICERS OR ANOTHER PERSON IF NOT SEIZED
FORTHWITH OR BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 6:00 P.M.  AND  9:00  A.M.,  IN  WHICH
EVENT  THE  REQUEST  MUST CONTAIN FACTS TO SUPPORT SUCH APPLICATION, AND
THE  COURT  MUST MAKE A FINDING IN WRITING OR ORALLY ON THE RECORD OR IN
WRITING UPON THE APPLICATION ITSELF SETTING FORTH THE FACTUAL BASIS  FOR
THE ISSUANCE OF THE WARRANT PURSUANT TO THIS SUBDIVISION.
  S 2. Subdivision 1 of section 690.35 of the criminal procedure law, as
amended  by  chapter  679  of  the  laws  of 1982, is amended to read as
follows:
  1. An application for a search warrant may be in writing or  oral.  If
in writing, it must be made, subscribed and sworn to by a public servant
specified  in  subdivision  one  of  section 690.05 OF THIS ARTICLE.  If
oral, it must be made by such a public servant and sworn to and recorded
in the manner provided in section 690.36 OF THIS ARTICLE.   AN  APPLICA-
TION  FOR A SEARCH WARRANT BASED EITHER IN WHOLE OR IN PART ON PARAGRAPH
(B) OF SUBDIVISION FOUR OF THIS SECTION, MUST BE MADE TO A COURT BETWEEN
THE HOURS OF 6:00 A.M. AND 9:00  P.M.  UNLESS  CIRCUMSTANCES  REASONABLY
REQUIRE  THAT  SUCH  APPLICATION BE MADE AT ANOTHER TIME, IN WHICH EVENT
SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES SHALL BE STATED IN THE APPLICATION FOR THE WARRANT.
  S 3.   Section 690.35 of the criminal  procedure  law  is  amended  by
adding a new subdivision 5 to read as follows:
  5.  WHEN  MAKING  AN  APPLICATION  BASED EITHER IN WHOLE OR IN PART ON
PARAGRAPH (B) OF SUBDIVISION FOUR OF THIS SECTION, IN  ADDITION  TO  THE
OTHER  REQUIREMENTS  FOR AN APPLICATION FOR A SEARCH WARRANT, THE APPLI-
CANT MUST ASCERTAIN, TO THE  EXTENT  REASONABLY  POSSIBLE,  WHETHER  ANY
PARTIES  OTHER  THAN  ANY SUBJECT OF THE SEARCH WARRANT SHALL BE PRESENT
WHEN THE WARRANT IS EXECUTED, AND IF SO, THE AGE AND PHYSICAL  CONDITION
OF THE PARTIES, AND REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES TO EXECUTING SUCH WARRANT IN
THE  PRESENCE  OF  SUCH INDIVIDUALS.   THE RESULTS OF SUCH INVESTIGATION
SHALL BE INCLUDED IN THE APPLICATION AND CONFORM WITH  THE  REQUIREMENTS
OF PARAGRAPH (C) OF SUBDIVISION THREE OF THIS SECTION.
  S  4. Subdivision 1 of section 690.40 of the criminal procedure law is
amended to read as follows:
  1. (A) In determining an application for a search  warrant  the  court
may  examine, under oath, any person whom it believes may possess perti-
nent information.   Any such examination  must  be  either  recorded  or
summarized on the record by the court.
  (B)  IN  DETERMINING AN APPLICATION FOR A SEARCH WARRANT BASED, EITHER
IN WHOLE OR IN PART, UPON THE GROUNDS  DESCRIBED  IN  PARAGRAPH  (B)  OF
SUBDIVISION  FOUR  OF  SECTION  690.35  OF THIS ARTICLE, THE COURT SHALL
STATE, WITH SPECIFICITY, IN WRITING OR ORALLY ON THE RECORD OR IN  WRIT-
ING  UPON  THE APPLICATION FOR THE WARRANT ITSELF, THE FACTUAL BASIS FOR
THE ISSUANCE OF THE WARRANT PURSUANT TO SUCH PARAGRAPH.
  S 5. Subdivision 6 of section 690.45 of the criminal procedure law, as
renumbered by chapter 679 of the laws of 1982, is  amended  to  read  as
follows:
  6.  A direction that the warrant be executed between the hours of 6:00
A.M.  and 9:00 P.M., or, where the court has specially so determined, an
authorization for execution thereof at any time  of  the  day  or  night
UNLESS  THE  WARRANT  HAS BEEN OBTAINED BASED ON AN APPLICATION BASED IN
WHOLE OR IN PART ON PARAGRAPH (B) OF SUBDIVISION FOUR OF SECTION  690.35
OF  THIS  ARTICLE,  IN  WHICH EVENT THE PROVISIONS OF SUBDIVISION TWO OF
SECTION 690.30 OF THIS ARTICLE RELATING TO THE TIME FOR  EXECUTING  SUCH
WARRANTS SHALL APPLY; and
  S 6. Section 690.50 of the criminal procedure law is amended by adding
a new subdivision 7 to read as follows:

S. 2594--A                          3

  7.  UPON  SEIZING  PROPERTY OR ARRESTING A PERSON PURSUANT TO A SEARCH
WARRANT ISSUED UNDER THIS ARTICLE, IN ADDITION TO  THE  REQUIREMENTS  OF
SUBDIVISIONS FIVE AND SIX OF THIS SECTION, THE POLICE OFFICER SHALL FILE
A REPORT WITH THE COURT THAT ISSUED SUCH WARRANT IN A FORM PRESCRIBED BY
THE  DIVISION  OF  CRIMINAL  JUSTICE  SERVICES PURSUANT TO SECTION EIGHT
HUNDRED THIRTY-SEVEN-S OF THE EXECUTIVE LAW,  SPECIFYING  THE  FOLLOWING
INFORMATION:
  (A)  IF  APPLICABLE,  THE SUBPARAGRAPH OF PARAGRAPH (B) OF SUBDIVISION
FOUR OF SECTION 690.35 OF THIS  ARTICLE  UPON  WHICH  SUCH  WARRANT  WAS
BASED;
  (B) THE OFFICER AND AGENCY WHICH OBTAINED THE WARRANT;
  (C) THE PROSECUTOR AND PROSECUTING OFFICE WHICH DRAFTED THE WARRANT;
  (D) WHETHER THE FACTS CONTAINED IN THE SUPPORTING AFFIDAVIT WERE BASED
UPON  A  CONFIDENTIAL INFORMANT, OR AN IDENTIFIED CITIZEN INFORMANT OR A
POLICE OFFICER, NONE OF WHOM MUST BE NAMED;
  (E) THE DATE AND TIME THE SEARCH WARRANT WAS APPLIED FOR AND THE  DATE
AND TIME THE SEARCH WARRANT WAS SIGNED;
  (F) THE DATE AND TIME THE SEARCH WARRANT WAS EXECUTED;
  (G) THE JUDGE WHO SIGNED AND THE COURT THAT ISSUED THE WARRANT;
  (H)  WHETHER THE APPLICATION FOR THE WARRANT ISSUED HAD BEEN SUBMITTED
TO ANOTHER JUDGE OTHER THAN THE JUDGE WHO ISSUED THE WARRANT  FOR  WHICH
THE REPORT IS SUBMITTED AND IF SO, WHEN SUCH APPLICATION OR APPLICATIONS
WERE MADE AND THE RESULT OF EACH SUCH APPLICATION;
  (I)  THE  AGE, SEX AND RACE OF THE INDIVIDUAL TO WHOM SUCH WARRANT WAS
DIRECTED;
  (J) WHETHER PHYSICAL FORCE OR DEADLY FORCE WAS USED IN EXECUTING  SUCH
WARRANT;
  (K) IF PHYSICAL OR DEADLY FORCE WAS USED:
  (I)  WHETHER  ANY INDIVIDUAL WAS INJURED OR KILLED AND IF SO, THE AGE,
SEX AND RACE OF EACH SUCH PERSON; AND
  (II) THE STATUS OF EACH SUCH PERSON, SPECIFYING WHETHER EACH  WAS  THE
SUBJECT OF THE SEARCH WARRANT, A POLICE OFFICER, OR A THIRD-PARTY;
  (L)  THE  ADDRESS  WHERE THE WARRANT WAS EXECUTED INCLUDING THE STREET
ADDRESS, CITY OR TOWN, COUNTY AND ZIP CODE;
  (M) THE RESULT OF EXECUTING THE WARRANT, SPECIFYING WHETHER:
  (I) EVIDENCE WAS SEIZED; AND
  (II) ANY INDIVIDUALS WERE ARRESTED, AND IF SO, WHETHER THE SUBJECT  OF
THE  WARRANT  WAS ARRESTED OR OTHER INDIVIDUALS NOT NAMED IN THE WARRANT
WERE ARRESTED; AND
  (N) WHETHER ANY PROPERTY WAS DAMAGED DURING THE  COURSE  OF  EXECUTING
THE WARRANT AND A DESCRIPTION THEREOF.
  S  7.  The  criminal  procedure law is amended by adding a new section
690.60 to read as follows:
S 690.60 SEARCH WARRANTS; MONETARY RESTITUTION.
  1. FOLLOWING THE EXECUTION OF A  SEARCH  WARRANT  ISSUED  PURSUANT  TO
PARAGRAPH (B) OF SUBDIVISION FOUR OF SECTION 690.35 OF THIS ARTICLE, THE
OWNER  OF  THE  PLACE OR PREMISES AT WHICH SUCH WARRANT WAS EXECUTED AND
THE OWNER OF ANY PROPERTY LOCATED AT SUCH PREMISES SHALL BE ENTITLED  TO
MONETARY RESTITUTION, PAID PROMPTLY BY THE STATE OR MUNICIPALITY EMPLOY-
ING  THE OFFICIALS WHO EXECUTED THE WARRANT, FOR A PREMISES, OR ANY PART
THEREOF, AND ANY ITEMS OF PROPERTY AT SUCH PREMISES THAT WERE DAMAGED OR
DESTROYED AS A PART OF THE EXECUTION OF SUCH WARRANT UPON SUCH PREMISES,
UNLESS SUCH OWNER OF SUCH PREMISES OR PROPERTY IS:
  (A) CONVICTED OF A CRIME INVOLVING  OR  RELATING  TO  PROPERTY  SEIZED
PURSUANT TO SUCH WARRANT; OR

S. 2594--A                          4

  (B)  CONVICTED  OF A CRIME INVOLVING OR RELATING TO THE SEARCH WARRANT
FOR SUCH PREMISES ISSUED PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (B) OF SUBDIVISION TWO OF
SECTION 690.05 OF THIS ARTICLE.
  2.  NOTHING  IN THIS SECTION SHALL BE CONSTRUED AS AFFECTING ANY OTHER
RIGHT, DUTY OR CAUSE OF ACTION THAT MAY EXIST WITH RESPECT TO ANY  PREM-
ISES,  OR PART THEREOF, OR ANY PROPERTY THAT MAY BE DAMAGED OR DESTROYED
AS A RESULT OF ANY SUCH ARREST OR SEARCH.
  S 8. The executive law is amended by adding a  new  section  837-s  to
read as follows:
  S  837-S.  ESTABLISH A FORM AND SYSTEM TO RECORD AND MONITOR THE ISSU-
ANCE AND EXECUTION OF  SEARCH  WARRANTS.    1.  THE  COMMISSIONER  SHALL
PRESCRIBE THE FORM OF DOCUMENT TO BE USED BY EVERY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGEN-
CY  OF  THE  STATE  AND  OF EACH MUNICIPALITY, CITY, TOWN AND VILLAGE TO
ACCOMPANY A REPORT TO BE PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WITH  SUBDIVISION  SEVEN
OF SECTION 690.50 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW.
  2. THE COMMISSIONER SHALL ESTABLISH A SYSTEM TO RECORD AND MONITOR THE
ISSUANCE AND EXECUTION OF SEARCH WARRANTS BY EVERY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGEN-
CY  IN  THE  STATE  OF NEW YORK. EVERY COURT THAT ISSUES SEARCH WARRANTS
SHALL FILE ON OR BEFORE THE THIRTY-FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER  OF  EACH  YEAR
WITH  THE  COMMISSIONER,  A  COPY OF EACH FORM FILED WITH SUCH COURT AND
PRESCRIBED IN SUBDIVISION ONE OF THIS SECTION,  RETAINING  THE  ORIGINAL
COPY  OF SUCH FORM WITH THE COURT. THE COMMISSIONER SHALL COLLECT, PROC-
ESS AND ANALYZE SUCH INFORMATION CONTAINED IN SUCH REPORTS, AND ISSUE  A
REPORT  BY  THE  THIRTIETH  DAY OF JUNE OF EACH YEAR WHICH SHALL BE MADE
PUBLIC AND A COPY OF WHICH SHALL BE SENT TO THE OFFICE OF COURT ADMINIS-
TRATION, EACH LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY, EACH CIVIL COMPLAINT REVIEW  BOARD
WITH  JURISDICTION  OVER  A POLICE OR LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY, AND TO THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK.
  S 9. Section 212 of the judiciary law  is  amended  by  adding  a  new
subdivision 3 to read as follows:
  3.  THE  CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR SHALL ALSO FORMULATE, ESTABLISH AND MAIN-
TAIN EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS, SEMINARS  AND  INSTITUTES  FOR  THE  JUDICIAL
PERSONNEL  OF  THE  UNIFIED  COURT  SYSTEM, TO BE SCHEDULED ON AN ANNUAL
BASIS, OR IF THE CIRCUMSTANCES WARRANT, MORE FREQUENTLY, ON THE  LAW  OF
SEARCHES,  ARRESTS AND SEIZURES UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK,
WITH EMPHASIS ON THE APPROPRIATE  STANDARDS  FOR  THE  ISSUANCE  OF  ALL
WARRANTS AUTHORIZED UNDER THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW.
  S  10.  This  act  shall  take effect on the one hundred eightieth day
after it shall have become a  law;  provided,  however,  that  effective
immediately,  the addition, amendment and/or repeal of any rule or regu-
lation necessary for the implementation of this  act  on  its  effective
date  are  authorized and directed to be made and completed on or before
such effective date.

Comments

Open Legislation is a forum for New York State legislation. All comments are subject to review and community moderation is encouraged.

Comments deemed off-topic, commercial, campaign-related, self-promotional; or that contain profanity, hate or toxic speech; or that link to sites outside of the nysenate.gov domain are not permitted, and will not be published. Attempts to intimidate and silence contributors or deliberately deceive the public, including excessive or extraneous posting/posts, or coordinated activity, are prohibited and may result in the temporary or permanent banning of the user. Comment moderation is generally performed Monday through Friday. By contributing or voting you agree to the Terms of Participation and verify you are over 13.

Create an account. An account allows you to sign petitions with a single click, officially support or oppose key legislation, and follow issues, committees, and bills that matter to you. When you create an account, you agree to this platform's terms of participation.

Senate Bill S2594

Share this bill

Sponsored By

Eric Adams