Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Digital Evidence topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances bill extending warrant return period for digital evidence to one year
Summary
SB 442 would extend the statutory return period for warrants seeking digital evidence from 45 days to one year to accommodate encrypted devices and large volumes of data; prosecutors and law enforcement testified that the change is needed to avoid suppression and to allow forensic work to proceed.
Get email alerts on the Digital Evidence topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate Bill 442, presented by Senator Yarbrough, would extend the statutory period for returning warrants in digital-evidence searches from the current 45 days to one year. The Criminal Justice Committee reported the bill favorably after testimony from prosecutors and law-enforcement officials describing forensic backlogs and the scale of digital material in serious investigations.
Yarbrough told senators that improved device encryption and the explosion of cloud and camera footage have increased both the volume of evidence and the time required for forensic extraction. ‘‘When undercover officers responded, they received 1,000,000 videos and pictures of child exploitation material,’’ the sponsor said to illustrate the potential scale in child-exploitation cases.
State Attorney Jack Campbell urged support, saying prosecutors routinely face enormous volumes of encrypted material and ‘‘we are playing against Apple and the related technology companies’’ when trying to access evidence. Ryan Ellis of the Clay County Sheriff’s Office described long forensic timelines and the practical need for more time to complete extraction and analysis.
Sponsors emphasized that the bill does not change probable-cause standards or judicial oversight; judges still sign and oversee warrants, the sponsor said. Committee roll call recorded favorable votes and the measure was reported forward for further consideration.
Votes: Reported favorably by committee; witnesses included state attorneys and sheriff’s offices.
