senate Bill S1278

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 pdf

Sponsor

Bill Status


  • Introduced
  • In Committee
  • On Floor Calendar
    • Passed Senate
    • Passed Assembly
  • Delivered to Governor
  • Signed/Vetoed by Governor
view actions

actions

  • 09 / Jan / 2013
    • REFERRED TO CODES

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.

do you support this bill?

Bill Details

See Assembly Version of this Bill:
A2935
Versions:
S1278
Legislative Cycle:
2013-2014
Current Committee:
Senate Codes
Law Section:
Criminal Procedure Law
Laws Affected:
Amd §§690.30, 690.35, 690.40, 690.45 & 690.50, add §690.60, CP L; add §837-s, Exec L; amd §212, Judy L
Versions Introduced in Previous Legislative Cycles:
2011-2012: S3606, A2196
2009-2010: S2594A, A1508A
2007-2008: S7361, A776A

Sponsor Memo

BILL NUMBER:S1278

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 §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-s 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 180 days after it
becomes a law.

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
consid-
ered 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:
02/28/11 S3606 REFERRED TO CODES
01/04/12 REFERRED TO CODES

01/14/11 A2196 referred to codes
05/17/11 reported
05/19/11 advanced to third reading cal. 369
01/04/12 referred to codes
02/14/12 reported
02/16/12 advamced to third reading cal. 343

2011; A.2196/s.3606
2010: A.1508-A/S.2594-A - Held in Codes
2007 -- A.775A 2007 -- A.775 Passed Assembly
2005-06 -- A.6696 Passed Assembly
2003-04 -- A.8848-A 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.


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

                                  1278

                       2013-2014 Regular Sessions

                            I N  S E N A T E

                               (PREFILED)

                             January 9, 2013
                               ___________

Introduced  by  Sen.  ADAMS  -- read twice and ordered printed, and when
  printed to be committed to the Committee on Codes

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
SAFETY OF THE EXECUTING POLICE OFFICERS OR ANOTHER PERSON IF NOT  SEIZED

 EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
                      [ ] is old law to be omitted.
                                                           LBD00633-01-3

S. 1278                             2

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. 1278                             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. 1278                             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 comments facilitate discussion of New York State legislation. All comments are subject to moderation. Comments deemed off-topic, commercial, campaign-related, self-promotional; or that contain profanity or hate speech; or that link to sites outside of the nysenate.gov domain are not permitted, and will not be published. 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.