In an era where technology is constantly advancing, courts are actively seeking efficient methods to streamline their processes. Among the various strategies, completing search warrants electronically has emerged as a promising solution in court technology. Judge Kate Huffman, from Montgomery County, Ohio, has recently shed light on her court's innovative adoption of the ezWarrant system through an article published in the Ohio Judicial Conference. Such progressive measures are bound to enhance efficiency and effectiveness within the judicial system, ensuring a seamless transition into the digital age. Check out what Judge Huffman has to say:
In recent years, judges and attorneys have come to embrace technology in legal proceedings, including, among other innovations, remote depositions, hearings and electronic discovery. The pandemic brought an opportunity to explore innovations in law practice and court operations. The Ohio Supreme Court recommended, during the early days of the pandemic, that courts evaluate the appropriate use of technology in legal proceedings, inspiring the reimagining of how courts procedurally do business.
In its 2021 report, the iCourt Task Force recommended that courts robustly utilize technology in court proceedings and adapt rules governing the practice and procedure of courts to incorporate into the culture of the legal practice and court operations the use of technology, with the corresponding effect of promoting access to justice.
Supported by the recommendations of the iCourt Task Force, the Ohio Supreme Court amended Crim. R. 41(C)(1), effective July 1, 2021, permitting the presentation and execution of search warrants by reliable electronic means. Thus, any court of record in Ohio may exercise its responsibility to issue search warrants based upon probable cause by utilizing remote means to not only receive a proposed affidavit as well as the accompanying search warrant, but also to administer the oath to the affiant and complete the necessary signatures.
The U.S. Supreme Court effectively sanctioned utilizing reliable electronic means in search warrant procedures in Missouri v. McNeely, 569 U.S. 141(2013), where the Court acknowledged that “[w]ell over a majority of States have innovated with technology-based developments that allow applications for search warrants to be made remotely through various reliable electronic means.”
The terms “expedited warrant,” “electronic warrant,” and “e-warrants,” all describe a system that utilizes remote technology to more efficiently complete the judicial function of authorizing a search warrant. Perhaps most importantly, any electronic search warrant system must maintain the same standard of probable cause as required when the judicial officer meets with the law enforcement officer in person and manually executes the affidavit and warrant.
Thus, armed with both a rule sanctioning search warrant procedures utilizing reliable electronic means, and a U.S. Supreme Court decision essentially acknowledging the constitutionality of electronic search warrant procedures, in mid-2021, and in anticipation of the July 1, 2021 effective date of revised Crim. R. 41(C)(1), stakeholders in Montgomery County
Using technology to secure a search warrant by reliable electronic means reduces the time and costs of securing a search warrant. The typical process for obtaining a search warrant usually involves an officer completing the affidavit and preparing the proposed search warrant; locating, contacting and traveling to a judicial officer’s location; sometimes waiting a significant amount of time for the judge to be available; sufficient opportunity for the judge to review the affidavit and the warrant; securing signatures; and then traveling to the search location or returning to service. Where time is of the essence in securing the warrant, such as in impaired driving cases, obtaining a search warrant by expedited means proves important.
Following extensive study, the Montgomery County team acknowledged the importance of a customizable county-wide system to meet the unique needs of all stakeholders in the county. The team recognized that expedited warrants can save resources, including time and money, by allowing officers to quickly return to service rather then expending valuable time traveling to and awaiting the availability of a judicial officer, eliminating the potential for scrivener’s errors, improving records management, and reducing disruption to judges. Equally important, though, in Commonwealth v. Almonor, 482 Mass. 35 (2019), a Massachusetts court recognized that the opportunity to obtain a search warrant by remote electronic means may reduce the frequency with which law enforcement officers resort to exigent circumstances to support a warrantless search. A concurring opinion in Almonor acknowledged that the time has come for courts to embrace technology in the submission and authorization of search warrants, noting that “after properly obtaining a warrant or facing exigent circumstances [law enforcement officers] may employ Twenty-first Century technologies to solve Twenty-first Century crimes. But requiring officers to locate and then personally appear before a judge or magistrate when the courthouse is closed — or when the affiant is far away from the judge or magistrate — is hardly a Twenty-first Century procedure.”
Areas of concern for the Montgomery County team focused on system integrity and security, necessary equipment, workflow, processes and procedures, ease of use and accessibility, records retention, administrative concerns, and cost allocation. In order to maintain the integrity of the warrant process, the team’s expectations in selecting the system included:
• The defendant must receive the same information and documentation as if the warrant was presented and signed in person
• Potential scrivener’s errors must be eliminated
• The system must alert any judicial officer when any affidavit had previously been
reviewed by another judge, who had found probable cause was lacking
After evaluating several expedited warrant systems, the team recognized that many of the available options required an expensive individual license or a fee, failed to utilize sufficient safeguards to maintain integrity, or were business-based, rather than customized to the justice system. Ultimately, the Montgomery County team selected the ezWarrant system, an application available through the ezJustice Platform. The ezWarrant system represents one in a suite of products available from the same company that provides many courts with supervision services applications through the Ohio Community Supervision System (OCSS), and is an authorized vendor on the state term schedule. The team’s security concerns were satisfied upon learning that the ezWarrant system is housed on the same data center as LEADS, the State of Ohio Computer Center.
The ezWarrant product proved easy to implement and use for all stakeholders. The ezWarrant system provides access to all persons involved in the warrant process, including prosecutors, who have access to review warrants prior to submission to the judge. Application access may be accomplished with any web-enabled electronic device, including a cell phone, tablet, desk-top computer, or cruiser computer.
Connection to the application by law enforcement remains limited to those officers who have been authorized by their department, much like access to LEADS and other law- enforcement related databases and other systems. Each law enforcement agency assigns to the system an administrator, who enables an officer’s connection to the ezWarrant application. The Montgomery County team also chose to designate a county-wide administrator for the system to serve as a liaison between the courts, prosecutors, law enforcement and the vendor, and to assist with on-boarding application users.
To further add to the expeditious submission of the necessary documents to an available judge, Montgomery County prosecutors provided templates in the application which are available to all law enforcement officers for use in preparing a proposed affidavit and search warrant. The templates include those for Facebook, Google, electronic devices, DNA, impaired driving and other frequently requested searches.
Once the law enforcement officer completes the proposed affidavit and search warrant, the officer selects a judge to review the documents, and the system then automatically contacts the judicial officer by means designated by the judge, including through text message, telephone call or e-mail. If a court designates a duty judge for a particular time period, the system generates an immediate notification directly to the duty judge. The communication sent to the judge includes contact information for the requesting law enforcement officer. The judge signs into the application, acknowledges receipt of the affidavit and warrant and, after reviewing the documents, will either find probable cause and accept the warrant for signature, or, lacking probable cause, reject the warrant. If the warrant is accepted based upon a finding of probable cause, the judge then calls the affiant, administers the oath by telephone, and signs the warrant by clicking on the signature button. Because of the security within the application, no one other than an authorized officer could communicate with the court through the ezWarrant system, but if the judge prefers to visually confirm the officer’s identity, corroboration can be completed through FaceTime, Zoom or some other electronic means. Using a two-factor security system, the application requires the judge to confirm authorization of the warrant by supplying a unique four digit identifier. The affiant immediately receives notification from the system that the warrant was signed.
The successful implementation of any local electronic search warrant program necessarily requires collaboration between stakeholders. Each entity provides valuable input to improve access to justice and court operations through the use of technology, while maintaining the standards necessary for the issuance of a warrant based upon probable cause."
*The purpose of this article is to discuss the development of an electronic search warrant program in any court or jurisdiction. This article is not intended to endorse any product or particular platform for an electronic search warrant program, but instead to discuss one county’s experience in developing a local program.""
By adopting the ezWarrant system, Montgomery County has experienced a transformative shift in the way search warrants are obtained and processed. The implementation of this electronic platform has eliminated the need for law enforcement officers to physically appear before a judge or magistrate, especially during times when the courthouse is closed or when the affiant is far away. This has not only expedited the warrant process but has also reduced the reliance on exigent circumstances to support warrantless searches.
One of the key factors that influenced the county's decision to choose the ezWarrant system was its commitment to maintaining the integrity of the warrant process. The system ensures that defendants receive the same information and documentation as if the warrant was presented and signed in person.
"After evaluating several expedited warrant systems, the team recognized that many of the available options required an expensive individual license or a fee, failed to utilize sufficient safeguards to maintain integrity, or were business-based, rather than customized to the justice."
Additionally, it eliminates potential scrivener's errors and alerts judicial officers when an affidavit has previously been reviewed by another judge who found probable cause lacking. With end-to-end encryption, the ezWarrant system prioritizes system integrity and security, instilling confidence in all stakeholders involved.
The implementation of the ezWarrant system was seamless, thanks to its user-friendly interface and accessibility across various web-enabled devices: Prosecutors have direct access to review warrants before submission to the judge, ensuring a thorough and efficient review process. Law enforcement officers, authorized by their departments, can easily connect to the application and submit proposed affidavits and search warrants. The system even provides templates for commonly requested searches, further streamlining the warrant preparation process.
Once the proposed affidavit and search warrant are completed, the officer selects a judge to review the documents. The system then automatically contacts the judicial officer through the judge's preferred means of communication, whether it be text message, phone call, or email. The judge can review the documents, find probable cause, and accept the warrant for signature directly within the application. To maintain security, the application implements a two-factor authentication system, requiring the judge to confirm authorization by providing a unique four-digit identifier. Once the warrant is signed, the affiant receives immediate notification through the system, ensuring a seamless and efficient process.
The success of the ezWarrant system extends beyond its ease of use and efficiency. Montgomery County recognized the potential financial savings associated with implementing such a system. By estimating the number of search warrants sought per year by all law enforcement agencies in the county and conservatively estimating a one-hour time-saving per warrant, the team projected an annual cost savings of approximately $70,000. With this supporting data, the team sought assistance from the Montgomery County Commissioners, who recognized the value of the electronic search warrant system for public safety and approved the annual cost of $25,000.
"...the team estimated an annual cost savings across the county at approximately $70,000."
The collaborative effort between the courts, prosecutors, law enforcement, and the ezJustice has been instrumental in the successful implementation of the ezWarrant system. This collaboration, combined with the dedication to embracing technology while upholding the standards necessary for the issuance of a warrant based on probable cause, has resulted in a highly rewarding outcome for Montgomery County. The county's commitment to leveraging technology in the justice system has not only improved efficiency and saved valuable time and resources but has also set a precedent for other jurisdictions to follow. The experience of Montgomery County serves as a testament to the importance of embracing new technology and adapting to the evolving needs of the justice system.
To learn more about the ezWarrant check out ezJustice's website here