(a)If the magistrate is thereupon satisfied of the existence of the grounds of the application, or that there is probable cause to believe their existence, he or she must issue a search warrant, signed by him or her with his or her name of office, to a peace officer in his or her county, commanding him or her forthwith to search the person or place named for the property or things or person or persons specified, and to retain the property or things in his or her custody subject to order of the court as provided by Section 1536.
(b)The magistrate may orally authorize a peace officer to sign the magistrate’s name on a duplicate original warrant. A duplicate original warrant shall be deemed to be a search warrant for the purposes of this chapter, and it shall be returned to the magistrate as provided for in Section 1537. The magistrate shall enter on the face of the original warrant the exact time of the issuance of the warrant and shall sign and file the original warrant and the duplicate original warrant with the clerk of the court as provided for in Section 1541.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
18
cases, 1957–2018 · leading case:
State v. Ettenhofer, 79 P.3d 478 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003).
State v. Ettenhofer, 79 P.3d 478 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 2× “Section 1528 then commanded that, if the magistrate was satisfied that probable cause existed, he was to “issue a search warrant, signed by him with his name of office” (former Cal. Penal Code § 1528 (a) (1970)), or he could “orally authorize a peace officer to sign the…”
People v. Bell, 96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3660 (Cal. Ct. App. 1996).
“(Pen. Code, §§ 1528, subd. (a), 1530, 1535.”
Arata v. Superior Court, 315 P.2d 473 (Cal. Ct. App. 1957).
· cites it 2× “The specific facts thus laid before the magistrate furnished ample support for his becoming “satisfied of the existence of the grounds of the application, or that there is probable cause to believe their existence” (Pen. Code, § 1528; emphasis added), if he believed the affiant;…”
People v. Keener, 361 P.2d 587 (Cal. 1961).
“(Pen. Code, § 1528.) After the search the officer executing the warrant must return it to the magistrate with a written inventory verified by affidavit.”
People v. Ruiz, 217 Cal. App. 3d 574 (Cal. Ct. App. 1990).
“” Penal Code section 1528, subdivision (a) provides that when a magistrate is satisfied of the existence of the grounds for a warrant he must issue a warrant “to a peace officer in his county.”
People v. Emanuel, 87 Cal. App. 3d 205 (Cal. Ct. App. 1978).
“Penal Code section 1528, subdivision (a), requires a magistrate who is satisfied that probable cause exists to issue a search warrant “to a peace officer in his county, commanding him to forthwith search the person or place named .”
People v. Govea, 235 Cal. App. 2d 285 (Cal. Ct. App. 1965).
“” (Pen. Code, § 1528.) In determining the sufficiency of an affidavit for the issuance of a search warrant, the standard or test of probable cause is approximately the same as that applicable to an arrest without a warrant, a commitment by a magistrate or an indictment by a…”
People v. Superior Court, 28 Cal. App. 3d 600 (Cal. Ct. App. 1972).
“3 Penal Code sections 1528 and 1536 which direct the officer executing the search warrant to retain custody of the seized property subject to the order of the court prevails over conflicting language in Penal Code sections 1523 and 1529 directing the officer to deliver the…”
Williams v. Just. Court, 230 Cal. App. 2d 87 (Cal. Ct. App. 1964).
“’ ’ 3 Penal Code section 1528 states: “If the magistrate is thereupon satisfied of the existence of the grounds of the application, or that there is probable cause to believe their existence, he must issue a search warrant, signed by him with his name of office, to a peace…”
Guthrie v. State, 668 P.2d 1147 (Okla. Crim. App. 1983).
“The court reasoned as follows: Penal Code section 1528, subdivision (a), requires a magistrate who is satisfied that probable cause exists to issue a search warrant “to a peace officer in his county, commanding him forthwith to search the person or place named..”
People v. Meza, 162 Cal. App. 3d 25 (Cal. Ct. App. 1984).
“3d 323 [magistrate’s failure to sign and file an original search warrant held inconsequential when a duplicate telephonic warrant signed by the peace officer was authorized by the magistrate (Pen. Code, § 1528)].) In People v. Superior Court (Robinson) (1977) 75 Cal.”
People v. Perez, 189 Cal. App. 2d 526 (Cal. Ct. App. 1961).
“(Pen. Code, § 1528.) ” Cases relating to probable cause when a search is made by an officer without a warrant are, therefore, helpful in resolving the problem presented in the present case.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.