C.F.R. » Title 28 » CHAPTER I—DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE › PART 60—AUTHORIZATION OF FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS TO REQUEST THE ISSUANCE OF A SEARCH WARRANT

28 C.F.R. § 60.1

Purpose

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

This regulation authorizes certain categories of federal law enforcement officers to request the issuance of search warrants under Rule 41, Fed. R. Crim. P., and lists the agencies whose officers are so authorized. Rule 41(a) provides in part that a search warrant may be issued “upon the request of a federal law enforcement officer,” and defines that term in Rule 41(h) as “any government agent, * * * who is engaged in the enforcement of the criminal laws and is within the category of officers authorized by the Attorney General to request the issuance of a search warrant.” The publication of the categories and the listing of the agencies is intended to inform the courts of the personnel who are so authorized. It should be noted that only in the very rare and emergent case is the law enforcement officer permitted to seek a search warrant without the concurrence of the appropriate U.S. Attorney's office. Further, in all instances, military agents of the Department of Defense must obtain the concurrence of the appropriate U.S. Attorney's Office before seeking a search warrant.

[Order No. 826-79, 44 FR 21785, Apr. 12, 1979, as amended by Order No. 1026-83, 48 FR 37377, Aug. 18, 1983]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2000–2003 · leading case: United States v. Allen, 53 M.J. 402 (C.A.A.F. 2000).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United States v. Allen, 53 M.J. 402 (C.A.A.F. 2000). · cites it 4× “Whether the search warrant violates 28 CFR § 60.1 , as applied to the AFOSI by paragraph 6(c) of AFOSI Regulation 124-82 .”
Harris v. United States, 834 A.2d 106 (D.C. 2003). “Cf 28 C.F.R. § 60.1 (2003) (“[0]nly in the very rare and emergent case is the law enforcement officer permitted to seek a search warrant without the concurrence of the appropriate U.”
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.