A superior court warrant of arrest can be executed by any police officer it’s addressed to, or any other police officer delegated to execute it under certain circumstances. The issuing court can authorize the delegation of said warrant. Where the issuing court has authorized, a police officer who a superior court arrest warrant is addressed to can delegate another police officer it’s not addressed to to execute the warrant as their agent when they have reasonable cause to believe the defendant is in a particular county other than the one where the warrant’s returnable, and the geographical employment area of the delegated police officer embraces the location where the arrest is going to be made.

Under certain circumstances, the police officer who the warrant is addressed to can inform the delegated officer of the issuing of the warrant, of the crime charged in the underlying accusatory instrument, and of all other pertinent details, and can request the officer to act as their agent in arresting the defendant. On this request, the delegated police officer is considered to be to the same extent as the delegating officer, authorized to make the arrest in regards to the warrant in the geographical employment area of the delegated officer. On arresting the defendant, they must without delay deliver the defendant to the custody of the police officer by whom they were delegated, and the latter must then without delay bring the defendant before a court where the warrant is returnable. If the court isn’t available, the delegating officer can bring the defendant to the local correctional facility of the county where said court sits, to be detained there until no later than the commencement of the next session of court occurring on the next business day.

What are the defendant’s rights in this matter?

On the defendant’s arraignment before a superior court, the court has to immediately inform them of the charge(s) against them, and the DA must cause them to be furnished with a copy of the indictment. The defendant has a right to the aid of counsel at the arraignment, and also at every later stage of the action, and, if they appear on the arraignment without counsel, they have the following rights: to an adjournment for the purpose of obtaining counsel, to communicate, free of charge for the purposes of obtaining counsel and informing a relative or friend that they’ve been charged with a crime, and to have counsel assigned by the court in any case where they’re financially unable to obtain this.

The court has to inform the defendant of all of their rights. The court has to give the defendant opportunity to exercise these rights and must itself take affirmative action as necessary to effectuate them. If the defendant wants to proceed without the aid of counsel, the court has to permit them to do so if it’s satisfied that they made such decision with knowledge of the significance, but if it’s not so satisfied, it will not proceed until the defendant’s provided with counsel, either of their own choosing or by assignment. A defendant who proceeds at the arraignment without counsel doesn’t waive their right to counsel, and the court must inform them that they continue to have such right, as well as all the rights specified earlier that are necessary to effectuate it, and that they may exercise these rights at any stage of the action. On the arraignment, the court, unless it intends to make a final disposition of the action immediately after, has to issue a securing order releasing the defendant on their own recognizance or fixing bail or committing them to the custody of the sheriff for their future appearance in said action.

At Joseph Potashnik and Associates, PC, the people always come first. Let us help you, and make the first step by getting in touch with us today. It’ll be the best thing you do today.