State Codes and Statutes

Statutes > Virginia > Title-27 > Chapter-9 > 27-98-5

§ 27-98.5. Review by courts.

A. No court of the Commonwealth shall have jurisdiction to hear a challengeto the warrant prior to its return to the issuing judge or magistrate exceptas a defense in a contempt proceeding, unless the owner or custodian of thebuilding, structure, property or premises to be inspected makes by affidavita substantial preliminary showing accompanied by an offer of proof that (i) afalse statement, knowingly and intentionally, or with reckless disregard forthe truth, was included by the affiant in his affidavit for the inspectionwarrant and (ii) the false statement was necessary to the finding of probablecause. The court shall conduct such expeditious in camera view as the courtmay deem appropriate.

B. After the warrant has been executed and returned to the issuing judge, thevalidity of the warrant may be reviewed either as a defense to any citationissued by the fire official or otherwise by declaratory judgment actionbrought in a circuit court. In any such action, the review shall be confinedto the face of the warrant and affidavits and supporting materials presentedto the issuing judge unless the owner, operator, or agent in charge of whosebuilding, structure, property or premises has been inspected makes asubstantial showing by affidavit accompanied by an offer of proof that (i) afalse statement, knowingly and intentionally, or with reckless disregard forthe truth, was made in support of the warrant and (ii) the false statementwas necessary to the finding of probable cause. The review shall onlydetermine whether there is substantial evidence in the record supporting thedecision to issue the warrant.

(1988, c. 549.)

State Codes and Statutes

Statutes > Virginia > Title-27 > Chapter-9 > 27-98-5

§ 27-98.5. Review by courts.

A. No court of the Commonwealth shall have jurisdiction to hear a challengeto the warrant prior to its return to the issuing judge or magistrate exceptas a defense in a contempt proceeding, unless the owner or custodian of thebuilding, structure, property or premises to be inspected makes by affidavita substantial preliminary showing accompanied by an offer of proof that (i) afalse statement, knowingly and intentionally, or with reckless disregard forthe truth, was included by the affiant in his affidavit for the inspectionwarrant and (ii) the false statement was necessary to the finding of probablecause. The court shall conduct such expeditious in camera view as the courtmay deem appropriate.

B. After the warrant has been executed and returned to the issuing judge, thevalidity of the warrant may be reviewed either as a defense to any citationissued by the fire official or otherwise by declaratory judgment actionbrought in a circuit court. In any such action, the review shall be confinedto the face of the warrant and affidavits and supporting materials presentedto the issuing judge unless the owner, operator, or agent in charge of whosebuilding, structure, property or premises has been inspected makes asubstantial showing by affidavit accompanied by an offer of proof that (i) afalse statement, knowingly and intentionally, or with reckless disregard forthe truth, was made in support of the warrant and (ii) the false statementwas necessary to the finding of probable cause. The review shall onlydetermine whether there is substantial evidence in the record supporting thedecision to issue the warrant.

(1988, c. 549.)


State Codes and Statutes

State Codes and Statutes

Statutes > Virginia > Title-27 > Chapter-9 > 27-98-5

§ 27-98.5. Review by courts.

A. No court of the Commonwealth shall have jurisdiction to hear a challengeto the warrant prior to its return to the issuing judge or magistrate exceptas a defense in a contempt proceeding, unless the owner or custodian of thebuilding, structure, property or premises to be inspected makes by affidavita substantial preliminary showing accompanied by an offer of proof that (i) afalse statement, knowingly and intentionally, or with reckless disregard forthe truth, was included by the affiant in his affidavit for the inspectionwarrant and (ii) the false statement was necessary to the finding of probablecause. The court shall conduct such expeditious in camera view as the courtmay deem appropriate.

B. After the warrant has been executed and returned to the issuing judge, thevalidity of the warrant may be reviewed either as a defense to any citationissued by the fire official or otherwise by declaratory judgment actionbrought in a circuit court. In any such action, the review shall be confinedto the face of the warrant and affidavits and supporting materials presentedto the issuing judge unless the owner, operator, or agent in charge of whosebuilding, structure, property or premises has been inspected makes asubstantial showing by affidavit accompanied by an offer of proof that (i) afalse statement, knowingly and intentionally, or with reckless disregard forthe truth, was made in support of the warrant and (ii) the false statementwas necessary to the finding of probable cause. The review shall onlydetermine whether there is substantial evidence in the record supporting thedecision to issue the warrant.

(1988, c. 549.)