N.D. R. Crim. P. 41
Joint Procedure Committee Minutes of April 26, 2019, pages 8-10; September 29-30, 2016, pages 2-5; January 26-27, 2012, pages 26-27; April 28-29, 2011, page 17; September 23-24, 2010, page 32; April 29-30, 2010, page 20, 25-26; April 28-29, 2005, pages 5-8; January 27-27, 2005, pages 33-34; April 28-29, 1994, pages 22-23; November 7-8, 1991, page 4; October 25-26, 1990, pages 15-16; April 20, 1989, page 4; December 3, 1987, page 15; October 15-16, 1981, pages 12-15; December 7-8, 1978, pages 23-26; October 12-13, 1978, pages 15-19; April 24-26, 1973, page 14; December 11-15, 1972, pages 31-37; November 18-20, 1971, pages 3-9; September 16-18, 1971, pages 11-32; March 12-13, 1970, page 3; November 20-21, 1969, pages 19-24; May 15-16, 1969, pages 21-23; Fed.R.Crim.P. 41.
EXPLANATORY NOTE
Rule 41 was amended, effective 9/1/1983;3/1/1990;3/1/19921/1/1995;3/1/2006;3/1/2011;3/1/2012;3/1/2013;12/15/2016 amended by Order September 4, 2019 effective 9/15/2019.
Rule 41 is an adaptation of Fed.R.Crim.P. 41 and is designed to implement the provisions of Article I, Section 8, of the North Dakota Constitution and the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which guarantee, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated; and no warrant shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons and things to be seized." To implement this constitutional protection, an illegal search and seizure will bar the use of such evidence in a criminal prosecution. The suppression sanction is imposed in order to discourage abuses of power by law enforcement officials in conducting searches and seizures.
Subdivision (a) provides that a search warrant be issued by a magistrate, either state or federal, acting within or for the territorial jurisdiction. The provision which permits a federal magistrate to issue a search warrant is the reciprocal of the federal rule, which permits a state magistrate to issue a search warrant pursuant to a federal matter. It is contemplated that a search warrant will be issued by a federal magistrate only on the nonavailability of a state magistrate.
Subdivision (a) does not require that the individual requesting the search warrant be a law enforcement officer. There appears to be common-law support for the use of the search warrant as a means of getting an owner's property back. The primary purpose of the rule, however, is the authorization of a search in the interest of law enforcement and as a practical matter the request for issuance of a search warrant by someone other than a law enforcement officer is virtually nonexistent.
Subdivision (a) was amended, effective 12/15/2016, to add language defining a search warrant.
Subdivision (b) describes the property or persons which may be seized with a lawfully issued search warrant. Issuance of a search warrant to search for items of solely evidential value is authorized. There is no intention to limit the protection of the Fifth Amendment against compulsory self-incrimination, so items that are solely "testimonial" or "communicative" in nature might well be inadmissible on those grounds.
Paragraph (c)(1) follows the federal rule except that North Dakota's rule permits the issuance of a warrant on sworn recorded testimony without an affidavit. Probable cause for the issuance of a search warrant should be assessed under the totality-of-circumstances test.
Paragraph (c)(1) was amended, effective December 15, 2016, to allow grounds for issuance of a search warrant to be established in a written declaration by a licensed peace officer made and subscribed under penalty of perjury. This amendment facilitates submission of electronic documents to establish the grounds for search warrants. Any electronic signature on a document submitted under this rule by a licensed peace officer is considered to be that of the officer.
Paragraph (c)(1) was amended, effective 9/15/2019, to remove language limiting the use of unsworn declarations to peace officers. N.D.C.C. ch. 31-15 allows anyone to make an unsworn declaration that has the same effect as a sworn declaration. N.D.C.C. § 31-15-05 provides the required form for an unsworn declaration.
The provision for examination of the affiant before the magistrate is intended to assure the magistrate an opportunity to make a careful decision as to whether there is probable cause based on legally obtained evidence. The requirement that the testimony be recorded is to insure an adequate basis for determining the sufficiency of the evidentiary grounds for the issuance of the search warrant if a motion to suppress is later filed.
The language of subparagraph (c)(1)(E), "for reasonable cause shown," is intended to explain the necessity for executing the warrant at a time other than the daytime. This provision is intended to be a substantive prerequisite to the issuance of a warrant that is to be executed at a time other than daytime, although it is not necessary that the quoted language ("for reasonable cause shown") be defined in subdivision (h).
Former paragraphs (c)(2) and (c)(3) were deleted and a new paragraph (c)(2) was added, effective3/1/2013, to allow the magistrate to issue a warrant based on information communicated by telephone or other reliable electronic means under the procedure set out in Rule 4.1.
Paragraph (c)(3) was added and paragraph (d)(1) was amended, effective3/1/2012, to provide guidelines for warrants authorizing the seizure of electronic storage media and electronically stored information and for the inventory of seized electronic material. The amendments were based on the12/1/2009, amendments to Fed.R.Crim.P. 41.
Subdivision (d) is intended to make clear that a copy of the warrant and an inventory receipt for property taken shall be left at the premises at the time of the lawful search or with the person from whose premises the property is taken if he is present.
Paragraph (d)(4) was amended, effective3/1/2013, to allow an officer to make a return by reliable electronic means.
Subdivision (e) requires that the motion for return of property be made in the trial court rather than in a preliminary hearing before the magistrate who issued the warrant. It further provides for a return of the property if: (1) the person is entitled to lawful possession, and (2) the seizure is illegal. However, property which is considered contraband does not have to be returned even if seized illegally. The last sentence of subdivision (e) provides that a motion for return of property, made in the trial court, shall be treated as a motion to suppress under N.D.R.Crim.P. 12. The purpose of this provision is to have a series of pretrial motions disposed of in a single appearance, such as at a Rule 17.1 (Omnibus Hearing), rather than in a series of pretrial motions made on different dates causing undue delay in administration.
Subdivisions (a), (b), and (c) were amended in 1983, effective 9/1/1983, to add persons as permissible objects of search warrants. These amendments follow 1979 amendments to Fed.R.Crim.P. 41 and are intended to make it possible for a search warrant to issue to search for a person if there is probable cause to arrest that person; or that person is being unlawfully restrained.
Subdivisions (c) and (d) were amended, effective3/1/1990. The amendments are technical in nature and no substantive change is intended. Subdivision (e) was amended, effective3/1/1992, to track the federal rule. Rule 41 was amended, effective3/1/2006, in response to the12/1/2002, revision of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. The language and organization of the rule were changed to make the rule more easily understood and to make style and terminology consistent throughout the rules.
STATUTES AFFECTED:
SUPERSEDED: N.D.C.C. §§ 29-29-02, 29-29-03, 29-29-04, 29-29-05, 29-29-06, 29-29-07, 29-29-10, 29-29-11, 29-29-12, 29-29-13, 29-29-14, 29-29-15, 29-29-16, 29-29-17.
CONSIDERED: N.D.C.C. ch. 31-15; N.D.C.C. §§ 12-01-04(12), 12-01-04(13), 29-01-14(3), 29-29-01, 29-29-08, 29-29-09, 29-29-18, 29-29-19, 29-29-20, 29-29-21, 31-04-02. N.D.C.C. ch. 28-29.1. N.D.C.C. ch.19-03.1.
N.D.R.Crim.P. 12 (Pleadings and Pretrial Motions); N.D.R.Crim.P. 17.1 (Omnibus Hearing and Pretrial Conference); N.D.R.Ct. 2.2 (Facsimile Transmission); N.D. Sup. Ct. Admin. R. 52 (Interactive Television).