Police twist the law to make it mean what they want it to mean! Original Article Court clarifies law on search warrants Michael Kiefer The Arizona Republic Nov. 25, 2004 12:00 AM How long do police have to serve a search warrant? Five days, but make that five calendar days, not five business days. The Arizona Court of Appeals ruled it such in a decision published Tuesday. The dilemma stemmed from a May 2003 case involving Phoenix police raiding an apartment near 22nd and Roosevelt streets. There, they hit the jackpot: methamphetamine, cocaine and a couple of confessions from the men in the apartment. But when the case came to Maricopa County Superior Court, defense attorneys asked that the evidence be thrown out. The search warrant the officers used in the raid was six days old, and Arizona state law says that search warrants much be executed and returned to the magistrate within five days. Judges can give extensions, and do, but none was asked for in this case. That's when prosecutors came up with the argument that the statute could be interpreted as five "business" days. The search warrant had been issued on a Friday with two weekend "non-business" days in the six-day mix. Judge Jeffrey A. Hotham ruled for the defense. The evidence was out. But prosecutors liked their argument so much they appealed to the higher court. "The statute specifies five days, and it doesn't say business days or calendar days," said Sgt. Randy Force a Phoenix police spokesman. "It's never been clear in my 22 years as a police officer." Judge James B. Sult, in the opinion of the appellate panel that heard the case, acknowledged that the Legislature had not written the statute in a way that made its intentions clear. But on analysis, the three-judge panel upheld Hotham's decision: Five days means five calendar days. "This was really a pure issue of law, a pure issue of statutory interpretation that the court engaged in," said Deputy Public Defender Charles R. Krull , who handled the appeal on behalf of the defendants. The Maricopa County Attorney's Office did not comment, pending a decision of whether it will appeal to the state Supreme Court. As for the defendants, "Quite often in drug cases such as this, if the contraband is suppressed, there's very little left upon which to pursue a criminal prosecution," Krull said. Force agreed. "On a single case, it can be painful," Force said. "But when you look at these decisions over the years, it's a natural evolution of law enforcement. Now we have a decision to base our actions on."