No search warrant shall be issued until there is filed with the officer authorized to issue the same an affidavit of some person reasonably describing the place, thing, or person to be searched, the things or persons to be searched for thereunder, alleging briefly material facts, constituting the probable cause for the issuance of such warrant and alleging substantially the offense or the identity of the person to be arrested for whom a warrant or process for arrest has been issued in relation to which such search is to be made and that the object, thing, or person searched for constitutes evidence of the commission of such offense or is the person to be arrested for whom a warrant or process for arrest has been issued. The affidavit may be filed by electronically transmitted (i) facsimile process or (ii) electronic record as defined in § 59.1-480. Such affidavit shall be certified by the officer who issues such warrant and delivered in person; mailed by certified mail, return receipt requested; or delivered by electronically transmitted facsimile process or by use of filing and security procedures as defined in the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (§ 59.1-479 et seq.) for transmitting signed documents, by such officer or his designee or agent, to the clerk of the circuit court of the county or city wherein the search is made, within seven days after the issuance of such warrant and shall by such clerk be preserved as a record and shall at all times be subject to inspection by the public after the warrant that is the subject of the affidavit has been executed or 15 days after issuance of the warrant, whichever is earlier; however, such affidavit, any warrant issued pursuant thereto, any return made thereon, and any order sealing the affidavit, warrant, or return may be temporarily sealed for a specific period of time by the appropriate court upon application of the attorney for the Commonwealth for good cause shown in an ex parte hearing. Any individual arrested and claiming to be aggrieved by such search and seizure or any person who claims to be entitled to lawful possession of such property seized may move the appropriate court for the unsealing of such affidavit, warrant, and return. The burden of proof with respect to continued sealing shall be upon the Commonwealth. Each such clerk shall maintain an index of all such affidavits filed in his office in order to facilitate inspection. No such warrant shall be issued on an affidavit omitting such essentials, and no general warrant for the search of a house, place, compartment, vehicle or baggage shall be issued. The term "affidavit" as used in this section, means statements made under oath or affirmation and preserved verbatim.
Failure of the officer issuing such warrant to file the required affidavit shall not invalidate any search made under the warrant unless such failure shall continue for a period of 30 days. If the affidavit is filed prior to the expiration of the 30-day period, nevertheless, evidence obtained in any such search shall not be admissible until a reasonable time after the filing of the required affidavit.
Code 1950, § 19.1-85; 1960, c. 366; 1973, c. 502; 1975, c. 495; 1976, c. 552; 1977, c. 109; 1979, c. 583; 1980, c. 362; 1981, c. 559; 1989, c. 719; 2006, c. 285; 2007, c. 212; 2008, cc. 147, 183; 2011, cc. 196, 219; 2012, c. 5; 2017, cc. 228, 233, 242, 641.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
52
cases (
6 in the last 5 years), 1977–2026 · leading case:
Commonwealth v. Campbell, 807 S.E.2d 735 (Va. 2017).
Commonwealth v. Campbell, 807 S.E.2d 735 (Va. 2017).
· cites it 27× “McCULLOUGH **489 We consider in this appeal whether evidence of a search must be suppressed under Code § 19.2-54 because a magistrate incorrectly faxed only portions of a search warrant to the clerk of the circuit court.”
Anthony Marquis Daniels v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 819 S.E.2d 870 (Va. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 34× “The second motion to suppress relied upon Code § 19.2-54 to argue for the suppression of “all evidence found pursuant to the searches conducted in the instant case, and to suppress all statements [Daniels] made to law enforcement officers[.”
James Willis Campbell, Sr. v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 791 S.E.2d 351 (Va. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 41× “The trial court found that the affidavit upon which the warrant was based was not filed as required by Code § 19.2-54, Virginia’s statute *680 prohibiting general warrants and detailing the procedures for filing warrants and affidavits.”
Lockhart v. Commonwealth, 542 S.E.2d 1 (Va. Ct. App. 2001).
· cites it 20× “On appeal, he contends the trial court erred (1) in denying his motion to suppress evidence obtained from a search of his home that was invalid because the magistrate failed to file the affidavit supporting the search warrant within thirty days as required by Code § 19.2-54, (2)…”
Derr v. Commonwealth, 410 S.E.2d 662 (Va. 1991).
· cites it 12× “The affidavits for the search warrants identified as the items to be searched for: a “[p]air of women’s pantyhose, a curved blade knife, and trace evidence consistent with the offense of rape such as hair, fibers, and body fluid.”
Janis v. Commonwealth, 472 S.E.2d 649 (Va. Ct. App. 1996).
· cites it 8× “Appellants assert that the trial court: (1) erred in denying their motion to suppress, which alleged that the search warrant's affidavit did not provide a sufficient basis to establish probable cause; (2) erred in applying the "good faith exception" to the probable cause…”
Garza v. Commonwealth, 323 S.E.2d 127 (Va. 1984).
· cites it 10× “In making his argument, Garza relies on Code § 19.2-54 which reads in pertinent part as follows: Such affidavit shall be certified by the officer who issues such warrant and delivered by such officer or other officer author *565 ized to certify such warrants to the clerk of the…”
Lane v. Commonwealth, 292 S.E.2d 358 (Va. 1982).
· cites it 6× “The basis for Lane’s objection at trial was that the warrant and affidavit were not available for inspection prior to trial as required by Code § 19.2-54. * She argues that under this Code section an affidavit not properly filed is inadmissible at trial.”
McCary v. Commonwealth, 321 S.E.2d 637 (Va. 1984).
· cites it 6× “2-54 states what shall be included in the affidavit and defines “affidavit” as “statements made under oath or affirmation and preserved verbatim.” We agree that the affidavit must include any supplementary facts presented to the magistrate to establish probable cause.”
Quintana v. Commonwealth, 295 S.E.2d 643 (Va. 1982).
· cites it 4× “Code § 19.2-54 provides that the affidavit "shall be certified by the officer who issues such warrant and delivered .”
Moyer v. Commonwealth, 531 S.E.2d 580 (Va. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 4× “The Fourth Amendment, designed to protect against unreasonable searches and seizures, provides that "no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
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.