(a) As used in sections 54-33a to 54-33g, inclusive, “property” includes, but is not limited to, documents, books, papers, films, recordings, records, data and any other tangible thing; and “tracking device” means an electronic or mechanical device that permits the tracking of the movement of a person or object.
(b) Upon complaint on oath by any state’s attorney or assistant state’s attorney or by any two credible persons, to any judge of the Superior Court or judge trial referee, that such state’s attorney or assistant state’s attorney or such persons have probable cause to believe that any property (1) possessed, controlled, designed or intended for use or which is or has been used or which may be used as the means of committing any criminal offense; or (2) which was stolen or embezzled; or (3) which constitutes evidence of an offense, or which constitutes evidence that a particular person participated in the commission of an offense, is within or upon any place, thing or person, such judge or judge trial referee, except as provided in section 54-33j, may issue a warrant commanding a proper officer to enter into or upon such place or thing, search such place, thing or person and take into such officer’s custody all such property named in the warrant.
(c) Upon complaint on oath by any state’s attorney or assistant state’s attorney or by any two credible persons, to any judge of the Superior Court or judge trial referee, that such state’s attorney or assistant state’s attorney or such persons have probable cause to believe that a criminal offense has been, is being, or will be committed and that the use of a tracking device will yield evidence of the commission of that offense, such judge or judge trial referee may issue a warrant authorizing the installation and use of a tracking device. The complaint shall identify the person on which or the property to, in or on which the tracking device is to be installed, and, if known, the owner of such property.
(d) A warrant may issue only on affidavit sworn to by the complainant or complainants before the judge or judge trial referee and establishing the grounds for issuing the warrant, which affidavit shall be part of the arrest file. If the judge or judge trial referee is satisfied that grounds for the application exist or that there is probable cause to believe that grounds for the application exist, the judge or judge trial referee shall issue a warrant identifying the property and naming or describing the person, place or thing to be searched or authorizing the installation and use of a tracking device and identifying the person on which or the property to, in or on which the tracking device is to be installed. The warrant shall be directed to any police officer of a regularly organized police department or any state police officer, to an inspector in the Division of Criminal Justice, to a conservation officer, special conservation officer or patrolman acting pursuant to section 26-6 or to a sworn motor vehicle inspector acting under the authority of section 14-8. Except for a warrant for the installation and use of a tracking device, the warrant shall state the date and time of its issuance and the grounds or probable cause for its issuance and shall command the officer to search within a reasonable time the person, place or thing named, for the property specified. A warrant for the installation and use of a tracking device shall state the date and time of its issuance and the grounds or probable cause for its issuance and shall command the officer to complete the installation of the device within a specified period not later than ten days after the date of its issuance and authorize the installation and use of the tracking device, including the collection of data through such tracking device, for a reasonable period of time not to exceed thirty days from the date the tracking device is installed. Upon request and a showing of good cause, a judge or judge trial referee may authorize the use of the tracking device for an additional period of thirty days.
(e) A judge or judge trial referee may issue a warrant pursuant to this section for records or data that are in the actual or constructive possession of a foreign corporation or business entity that transacts business in this state, including, but not limited to, a foreign corporation or business entity that provides electronic communication services or remote computing services to the public. Such a warrant may be served on an authorized representative of the foreign corporation or business entity by hand, mail, commercial delivery, facsimile or electronic transmission, provided proof of delivery can be established. When properly served with a warrant issued pursuant to this section, the foreign corporation or business entity shall provide to the applicant all records or data sought by the warrant within fourteen business days of being served with the warrant, unless the judge or judge trial referee determines that a shorter or longer period of time is necessary or appropriate.
(f) The inadvertent failure of the issuing judge or judge trial referee to state on the warrant the time of its issuance shall not in and of itself invalidate the warrant.
Conn. Gen. Stat. ยง 54-33a
(1963, P.A. 652, S. 1, 3; February, 1965, P.A. 439; 574, S. 46; P.A. 74-183, S. 138, 291; P.A. 76-436, S. 530, 681; P.A. 77-504; P.A. 79-14, S. 3; P.A. 80-313, S. 8; P.A. 81-227, S. 3; June Sp. Sess. P.A. 98-1, S. 39, 121; P.A. 00-31; P.A. 01-72, S. 2; P.A. 04-147, S. 2; P.A. 13-271, S. 42; P.A. 14-233, S. 9.)
Amended by P.A. 14-0233, S. 9 of the Connecticut Acts of the 2014 Regular Session, eff. 10/1/2014.
Former statute did not authorize seizure of contraceptive material. 126 C. 428. Under former statute, obscene materials could be seized regardless of who possessed them or of knowledge or intent in such possession. 146 C. 78. This section and sections 54-33b to 54-33g passed subsequent to Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, which held that evidence obtained by unlawful search and seizure is inadmissible in state courts; prior to such passage if search and seizure were incidental to lawful arrest, they were not unreasonable. 149 Conn. 567. Cited. 153 C. 8. Judge issuing search warrant not required to recite in warrant the grounds on which he found probable cause. Id., 708, 709. Warrant calling for search and seizure of passenger automobile includes whatever was an integral part or component of that automobile, e.g., dust on floor, stains on interior, seats and cushions. 155 C. 145. Neither the recital that affiant had information from reliable informant nor statement that apartment sought to be searched had been under surveillance were sufficient grounds for issuance of warrant; warrant issued was illegal. Id., 385. Cited. 165 C. 239; 169 C. 322; 170 C. 618; 181 Conn. 562; 196 C. 471; 206 C. 90; 219 C. 529; 224 C. 29; 226 C. 514. Cited. 10 CA 561; 30 CA 249. Search and seizure which, though without warrant, is consented to is not within exclusionary rule; but mere acquiescence in and peaceful submission to demands of searching officers is not to be construed as consent; defendant’s application for order to return articles illegally seized was denied. 23 CS 41. Where search warrant is issued and executed, presumption is that proper legal procedure was observed and burden is on defendant to overcome presumption. Id., 405. Even though evidence was obtained as result of illegal search and seizure, defendant was not entitled to motion to suppress evidence in advance of trial. 24 CS 36. Arrest for minor traffic violation did not justify search of car without a warrant; if stolen goods were in plain sight, search might have been justified. 25 CS 229. Reference in warrant, after specifying drugs and named instruments for using them, concluded “and any other paraphernalia” which could be used in taking drugs and was too broad; items not specifically mentioned in warrant could not be used in evidence. 28 CS 19. Cited. 41 CS 1. Where judge had before him no information which permitted him to make an independent judicial determination of the existence of probable cause for the issuance of a search and seizure warrant, the issuance of such warrant was in violation of the constitution and the evidence seized as a result of its execution is not admissible in defendants’ trial. 3 Conn. Cir. Ct. 97, 98. An unsigned and undated search warrant is fatally defective, invalid and void and confers no authority to act thereunder. Id., 641, 644. Supporting affidavit sufficient when it recited several instances of information by others of defendant operating his home for pool selling and police surveillance of activity of defendant in community; name of informant need not be disclosed. 4 Conn. Cir. Ct. 603. Cited. 5 Conn. Cir. Ct. 44, 46. Motion to suppress evidence obtained by search and seizure under warrant issued fourteen days before actual seizure granted on grounds execution of warrant was not made within reasonable time. Id., 468. Affidavit in support of search warrant for violation of pool selling statute, that set forth underlying circumstances, reasons informants were reliable, actual betting transactions and personal observation of defendant by affiants was sufficient. Id., 669. Subsec. (b): Cited. 179 C. 23; 192 C. 98; 229 Conn. 125. Cited. 1 CA 315. Possession or control of property is relevant, not ownership. 57 CA 396. Subsec. (d) (former Subsec. (c)): Cited. 179 C. 522. Search warrant, unsigned by judge, was not legally “issued”. 184 C. 95. Cited. 188 C. 183. Neither section nor the commonly approved definition of “affidavit” requires assigned jurat; judgment of Appellate Court in 32 CA 402 reversed. 230 C. 24. Cited. 14 CA 356; 32 Conn.App. 402; judgment reversed, see 230 Conn. 24; 39 CA 369. Provision that “warrant shall state the date and time of its issuance” does not invalidate warrant issued with incorrect time due to scrivener’s error. 124 CA 331, see also 307 C. 567.
See Sec. 54-154 re taxing of expenses in search and seizure cases.
