Search Guidelines - Stormwater - Laserfiche WebLink

New Search

Medlin/Long/Snyder November 28, 2000 Page 2 to the public. Examples of such property include property completely enclosed by a fence and locked gate,clearly posted"No Trespassing,"or upon which officials have been directed not to enter or remain. Although City officials have no special immunity from criminal prosecution for trespass conducted in furtherance of their duties, such prosecutions are extremely rare. Undoubtedly, prosecutors are reluctant to prosecute officials who were pursuing their public duties in good faith. Moreover,the element of whether the official's entry was unlawful typically would be very difficult to establish, as would the related question of whether the official had the requisite criminal intent. Judges and juries are also reluctant to brand a city inspector a criminal for his or her attempt to serve the city, particularly if no damage is done and the trespass is not egregious. Finally, in emergencies, public officials will not face a charge of criminal trespass. Entry onto property to prevent serious harm will not constitute criminal trespass. State v. Bridewell, 306 Or 231, 240 n. 5 (1988). 3. How easy is it to obtain a warrant from Municipal Court? The Eugene Municipal Court has suggested that City staff work through our office until everyone, including the court, is comfortable that the City is sufficiently familiar with the requirements and procedure to apply directly to the court for inspection warrants. There currently is no expedited process, and telephonic search warrants are not available. Presently,the process works as follows. Our office contacts the court and asks when a judge would be available to whom the City could submit an application for a search warrant. The court schedules an appearance, at which we present: 1) an affidavit of the proper City official showing the probable cause for a warrant to issue;and 2)a proposed search warrant. (Also,we prefer to have the affiant with us in order to answer any further questions from the court.) 4. Can the City combine inspection and abatement action in a single warrant? Conceivably,the nuisance abatement process could require the City to obtain three inspection warrants at different times: first,to determine whether a nuisance exists; second, after an order to abate, to determine compliance with the order; and third, in case of noncompliance, to enter the property to abate the nuisance. We have considered whether there is any way to streamline the warrant process to avoid the possible necessity of making three separate applications for warrants, and we conclude that there is no practical means to do so.3 3We note that there is one potential avenue—the use of an anticipatory search warrant(ASW); however,such warrants have not been clearly authorized in Oregon law,and given the Municipal Court's tentative approach regarding the issuance of administrative warrants,we believe that it would be highly unlikely to issue an ASW. An ASW is a warrant conditioning a search on an event that is to occur after issuance of the warrant. The occurrence of that event