If police placed your phone at a crime scene, the case against you may rest on data the Constitution now protects. As founder of The Brancato Law Firm, P.A., a Tampa criminal defense firm, and a former police academy legal instructor, I taught officers where the Fourth Amendment line sits, and I have spent more than 25 years in Hillsborough County courtrooms. Our attorneys use that line every week in suppression litigation, and Chatrie just redrew it for every criminal case in Florida built on cell-phone location data.

What Did the Supreme Court Decide in Chatrie v. United States?

The Supreme Court held that when police obtained a suspect’s Google “Location History” through a geofence warrant, they conducted a Fourth Amendment search — because people keep a reasonable expectation of privacy in their cell-phone location data. Chatrie v. United States, 146 S. Ct. 2193 (2026), extends the Court’s landmark 2018 decision in Carpenter v. United States, 585 U.S. 296 (2018) (which protected cell-site location records) to the far more precise location logs generated by smartphone apps.

Three points from the decision matter most for anyone facing charges. First, duration doesn’t save the government: the Court rejected the argument that a “short” window — the two hours pulled in Chatrie’s case — is too little to trigger the Fourth Amendment, explaining that even brief location records can reveal deeply private facts. Second, storage by a third party doesn’t matter: the Court held the “third-party doctrine” does not apply, because location data is “not truly shared” in any meaningful sense — it is simply the automatic price of using a modern phone. Third, the Court decided only that a search occurred. It vacated the Fourth Circuit’s judgment and sent the case back to decide whether the warrant satisfied probable cause and particularity, and whether the good-faith exception saves the evidence if it did not.

What Was the Chatrie Case About?

The case began with a bank robbery that stumped investigators. On May 20, 2019, a man robbed a credit union in Midlothian, Virginia; witnesses and surveillance showed him approaching from the corner of a neighboring church while appearing to talk on a cell phone, but the trail went cold. Police then obtained a geofence warrant directing Google to identify devices with Location History enabled near the credit union around the robbery. That process ultimately pointed to Okello Chatrie, whose phone data placed him at the scene — two hours of his movements, pulled from Google’s servers. He moved to suppress, lost on good-faith grounds in the lower courts, and the Supreme Court took the case to answer the threshold question: was this a “search” at all? Six Justices said yes.

What Is a Geofence Warrant — and Can Google Still Answer One?

A geofence warrant works in reverse: instead of naming a suspect and searching their data, police draw a virtual perimeter around a crime scene and ask a company — most famously Google — to identify every device inside it during a time window. The process in Chatrie ran in steps: first an anonymized list of devices in the zone, then expanded data to narrow the list, then the “unmasking” of specific accounts — names, emails, phone numbers. Justice Jackson’s concurrence flagged the core defect defense lawyers now argue: the later steps often happen with no criteria and no judge supervising which devices get unmasked, leaving “too much to the discretion” of the officers.

Geofence Surveillance, By the Numbers

The scale of this surveillance tool is why the decision matters far beyond one Virginia robbery — the numbers below come from the opinion itself.

Two details from the opinion deserve emphasis. Location History runs constantly in the background once enabled — whether or not the app is open, whether or not the phone is in use — and it keeps running even if the user deletes the app that turned it on. And Android users are specifically warned their devices will not “work correctly” unless they turn it on. The Court treated that reality for what it is: tracking as a default condition of modern life, not a voluntary broadcast of your whereabouts.

Is My Cell-Phone Location Data Protected by the Fourth Amendment?

Yes — after Chatrie, your historical location data is constitutionally protected whether it comes from cell towers or from app-based logs, and regardless of how short the time window is. The decision closes the two arguments the government had been using to avoid Carpenter.

The undecided fourth row is not a footnote — it is the battleground. A ruling that a search occurred means nothing in a specific case until a court examines whether the warrant (if there was one) was supported by probable cause and described the search with particularity. That examination is defense work, done case by case, device by device.

How Did the Justices Vote in Chatrie?

Justice Kagan wrote the majority opinion, joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Sotomayor, Kavanaugh, and Jackson — with Justice Gorsuch concurring in the judgment, making six votes for the outcome. Justice Jackson added a concurrence (joined by Justice Sotomayor) arguing the multi-step geofence process gave officers an unsupervised “roving commission.” Justice Gorsuch would have reached the result on different reasoning. Justice Alito dissented — warning the decision “will send seismic waves through our Fourth Amendment doctrine” — joined in part by Justices Thomas and Barrett, and Justice Barrett filed her own dissent.

The lineup matters for what comes next: the majority’s reasoning was joined by five Justices, the case produced four separate opinions, and the open questions — warrant validity, good faith, other kinds of digital records — will be litigated against that backdrop for years.

Does Chatrie Apply to Criminal Cases in Florida?

Yes — immediately and automatically. Florida’s own constitution, Article I, Section 12, commands that Florida’s search-and-seizure right “shall be construed in conformity with the 4th Amendment to the United States Constitution, as interpreted by the United States Supreme Court.” So Chatrie is not persuasive authority here; it is the governing rule in every Florida courtroom, from the 13th Judicial Circuit in Tampa outward.

Florida law enforcement already works with location technology under state statutes like Fla. Stat. § 934.42, which lets officers get court orders for mobile tracking devices — and which expressly makes U.S. Supreme Court standards govern their installation and monitoring. After Chatrie, those standards now clearly include a warrant requirement for historical app-based location data. In practice, our attorneys look for location evidence in Tampa Bay cases in three familiar places: geofence-style requests tied to a crime scene, account-specific demands for a suspect’s Google or Apple data, and downloads from a seized phone itself. Each source now has its own constitutional checklist, and a defect in any of them supports a motion to suppress. Our Tampa forensic science defense attorney page explains how we bring in digital-forensics experts to test that evidence.

What Comes Next — Are Reverse Keyword Warrants Legal?

Chatrie answered the geofence question but teed up the next fight: reverse keyword warrants, where police ask a search engine to identify everyone who searched a particular term — a victim’s name, an address, a chemical — during a window of time. The logic of Chatrie (a dragnet over mostly innocent people’s private data, revealed only because using the internet is the price of modern life) applies with obvious force, but the Supreme Court has not yet decided it, and lower courts are split on how far Carpenter and now Chatrie reach. The same goes for other data dragnets: tower dumps, automated license-plate reader networks, and purchases of location data from commercial brokers. Currency matters in this area more than almost any other — the constitutional rules your case is judged by may literally change between arrest and trial, which is why preserving these issues early is essential.

What Should You Do If Police Used Phone Location Data in Your Case?

Get the warrant paperwork in front of a defense lawyer before you make any decisions about your case. After Chatrie, the questions our attorneys ask are concrete: Was there a warrant at all, or just a subpoena or “exigent” request? Does the affidavit establish probable cause tied to the place and time searched? Did the warrant limit the geofence’s size, duration, and the unmasking steps — or did officers get a blank check? Was your data pulled at step one or only after unsupervised narrowing? Every one of those defects is a suppression argument, and in a case built on placing your phone at a scene, suppression is usually the whole case. Location-data challenges also travel with the rest of the digital-privacy toolbox — see our guides to whether the State can get your medical records in a DUI case and what to do after being arrested in Tampa. And because these motions are won on timing — witnesses’ memories, preservation letters to Google, litigation before the State’s filing decision — the sooner the defense starts, the more options you have. If you learn you are under investigation before any arrest, our representation before charges are filed can put those challenges in front of the prosecutor early.

For more about our defense strategies, visit our Tampa Criminal Forensic Science Attorney page.

For how this fits into the rest of a case, see our overview of how a Florida criminal case moves from investigation to appeal.

Frequently Asked Questions

Do police need a warrant to get my Google location history?

Yes. After Chatrie v. United States (2026), obtaining your historical cell-phone location data — including Google Location History — is a Fourth Amendment search, so police generally need a valid warrant supported by probable cause. Our attorneys examine whether the warrant in your case actually meets those requirements, because “a warrant existed” is not the same as “the warrant was valid.”

Can police still use geofence warrants after Chatrie?

Geofence warrants were not banned — the Court held only that they are searches, which means they require valid warrants. Whether any particular geofence warrant satisfies probable cause and particularity is now the contested question, and Justice Jackson’s concurrence gives the defense a roadmap for attacking the unmasking steps. We raise those challenges by motion to suppress in Florida courts.

Does Chatrie apply if police only got a couple hours of my location data?

Yes — that was precisely the government’s argument, and the Court rejected it. Two hours of Location History was enough to trigger the Fourth Amendment because even short windows reveal private associations. There is no minimum number of hours before your rights apply.

Will the evidence in my case be thrown out automatically?

No. Chatrie decided that a search occurred; whether evidence is suppressed depends on whether the warrant was valid and whether the good-faith exception applies — the questions remanded in Chatrie’s own case. That is exactly the analysis The Brancato Law Firm, P.A. performs when location data appears in discovery, because the suppression fight is where these cases are won or lost.

How do I know if a geofence warrant was used in my case?

You usually learn it from discovery — search warrant returns, affidavits, or references to Google legal process in reports. Defense counsel can demand the full warrant package, the data Google produced at each step, and the communications around it. If you were arrested in Hillsborough, Pinellas, or Pasco County and phone location evidence is involved, The Brancato Law Firm, P.A. can obtain and audit that paperwork.

Does turning off Location History protect me?

Turning it off stops Google’s Location History logging going forward, but other apps, your carrier’s cell-site records, and data brokers still generate location trails — each with its own legal protections. Chatrie and Carpenter now protect the two biggest categories. The safest assumption is that your phone creates records someone may one day try to use, and the Constitution now stands between those records and warrantless access.

Chatrie redrew the digital-privacy map on June 29, 2026, and the next rounds — warrant validity, good faith, keyword warrants — are being litigated right now. If cell-phone location data shows up anywhere in your Tampa Bay case, call the attorneys of The Brancato Law Firm, P.A. — founded by Tampa Criminal Defense Attorney Rocky Brancato — at (813) 727-7159 before the State’s filing decision is made. Suppression issues are strongest when they are raised early, and location-data challenges are the sharpest new tool in the box. Our firm has Spanish-speaking staff, and attorney Jean-Luc Adrien speaks Spanish, Haitian Creole, and French. Read our guide for Spanish-speaking and Haitian Creole-speaking clients.

The Brancato Law Firm, P.A.
620 E. Twiggs Street, Suite 205, Tampa, FL 33602
(813) 727-7159
Serving Hillsborough, Pinellas, and Pasco Counties

The Brancato Law Firm, P.A. is a Tampa-based criminal defense practice. We are not affiliated with any other Brancato-named law firms.

Most child pornography cases in Tampa begin with an automated report from a tech company, months before anyone knocks on a door. I learned how investigators build these cases as a police academy instructor teaching officers search-and-seizure law, and as a Major Crimes Unit attorney handling sex crime and child abuse cases. Today, as founder of The Brancato Law Firm, P.A., a Tampa criminal defense firm, I lead a team that defends people charged in Hillsborough, Pinellas, and Pasco Counties, many of whom had no record before the search warrant. Our attorneys start with the evidence trail: the report, the warrant, and the forensic image of each device.

How do child pornography investigations start in Florida?

Most cases start with a CyberTipline report from an online platform to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC), which routes it to law enforcement. Federal law, 18 U.S.C. § 2258A, requires providers to report apparent CSAM once they have actual knowledge of it, but expressly does not require them to monitor users or scan content. Many large platforms scan anyway, usually by comparing a file’s hash value, a digital fingerprint, to a list of known images.

The volume is enormous. In 2025, NCMEC made 126,256 CyberTipline reports available to law enforcement for Florida, including 70,812 referrals, according to NCMEC’s 2025 CyberTipline Reports by State. Nationally, NCMEC received 20.5 million reports in 2024. Each report then has to be traced to a person through subpoenas for subscriber and IP address records, which is where the State’s first assumptions enter the case.

Can the search be challenged?

Yes. A search challenge is often the strongest defense, because if the warrant falls, the files usually fall with it. In Burnett v. State, 848 So. 2d 1170 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003), a case investigated by the Polk County Sheriff’s Office, the Second District held that the affidavit supporting the warrant for the defendant’s computer and diskettes was fatally defective and reversed 136 counts of possession that flowed from the seizure. The court affirmed other convictions but threw out every possession count.

Our attorneys look for these warrant problems in every case:

• Thin probable cause. The affidavit must connect the person and the place to be searched to the files, not just repeat that a tip exists.
• Staleness. Months can pass between the tip and the warrant. Our article on the 10-day search warrant rule explains a reversal on timing grounds.
• Scope. A warrant for one device or account does not authorize a search of everything a person owns.
• Account warrants. Warrants to Google, Apple, or other providers raise their own issues, covered in our guide to a Google account legal request.

What is a private search doctrine motion to suppress?

A private search doctrine motion asks the court to suppress evidence because police opened a flagged file without a warrant when no person at the reporting company had looked at that file first. Under the U.S. Supreme Court’s private search cases, police may repeat a search a private party already did, but may not go beyond it without a warrant. When a tech company flags a file only by an automated hash match, the defense argues that no private person ever saw the contents, so the officer who opened the file conducted a new government search. Because police in many CyberTip cases open the files first and get warrants afterward, a win on this motion can take down every warrant built on that first look.

Our firm files these motions in Hillsborough County cases, and we build them from the CyberTip itself. Google’s CyberTips answer a question for each reported file: “Was File Reviewed by Company?” A “No” means no Google reviewer looked at that file for the report; the flag rests on a hash match to a different file someone reviewed in the past. We match every file the detective opened to that answer, and we point out what the State must prove at the hearing. A warrantless search shifts the burden to the State, so the prosecution must show, file by file, that a private person actually viewed what the officer opened.

Where do the courts stand on opening hash-matched files?

The courts are split, and Florida’s state appellate courts have not settled the question for the files a company never viewed. In Morales v. State, 274 So. 3d 1213 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019), a Santa Rosa County defendant uploaded an image to a chatroom whose service matched it to known CSAM through Microsoft’s PhotoDNA. No one at the company or NCMEC opened it before an FDLE agent did, without a warrant. The First District held that the agent’s viewing did not exceed the private search because the hash match identified the image with near certainty.

In Lowers, Google hash-matched 156 files in a Google Drive account, a reviewer opened 31, and the CyberTip showed which files were opened and which were not. A detective then opened files that neither Google nor NCMEC had viewed. The Fourth Circuit held that was an unconstitutional search. Brillhart, an appeal from the Middle District of Florida, went the other way on its record, but only because the file’s hash traced to a file a human at Google had already confirmed. The Second District, which hears appeals from Hillsborough, Pinellas, and Pasco Counties, has not squarely decided the question in the decisions we have reviewed. In Youngman v. State, 342 So. 3d 770 (Fla. 2d DCA 2022), it held only that police software finding files a defendant shared publicly on BitTorrent was not a search at all.

Legal scholars have questioned how far hash searches should reach. A 2018 Stanford Law Review note, Dennis Martin’s Demystifying Hash Searches, argues that police conduct a Fourth Amendment search whenever they use an algorithm to do what would be a search if done by hand.

How do our attorneys build a private search motion?

Our attorneys build the motion from the State’s own documents, in five steps:

1. Pull the per-file review answers. We read the CyberTip’s “Was File Reviewed by Company?” answer for every reported file.
2. Match them to what the detective opened. The warrant affidavits usually describe specific files; we check whether each described file was one no company employee viewed.
3. Hold the State to its burden. At the evidentiary hearing, the State must prove with competent evidence, not the tip’s own label, that a person reviewed each file the officer opened.
4. Excise the tainted descriptions. We ask the court to strike the officer’s descriptions of unlawfully viewed files from each warrant affidavit and test whether probable cause remains.
5. Defeat good faith and attenuation. Searches done after the 2021 Wilson decision are harder to excuse as good faith, and a client who invoked the right to counsel and gave no statement leaves the State no break in the chain, unlike the defendant in Lowers.

Lowers carries a practical lesson. The Fourth Circuit found the search unconstitutional and still let the evidence in because the defendant talked to police and consented to searches afterward. A person who stays silent and asks for a lawyer protects the motion as well as the case.

Can a CyberTip be wrong?

Yes. A CyberTip is a report, not proof, and both its labels and its claims about human review can be wrong. The clearest Florida example involves William Lawshe, a Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission officer who had been named national wildlife officer of the year in 2014. According to News4JAX reporting, a St. Johns County investigation that began with a February 2023 tip led to three counts of possessing child pornography, he left the agency, and the charges were dropped that December after his lawyers produced evidence they said proved his innocence.

Lawshe then sued Verizon and its cloud-storage contractor. In Lawshe v. Verizon Communications, Inc., No. 3:24-cv-137-MMH-LLL (M.D. Fla. Feb. 28, 2025), he alleged that his account held legal images of adult models and that the CyberTip behind his arrest rested on a hash match to an image tagged only “unconfirmed.” He alleged the report still stated that the company “had viewed the entire contents” of the image and that it showed a “pre-pubescent” minor, when the people pictured were plainly adults. Judge Marcia Morales Howard held that federal reporting immunity did not defeat his defamation and Stored Communications Act claims over that report at the pleading stage, writing that the defendants “conflate an intent to immunize mistaken reports with an intent to immunize unfounded reports.” The parties later settled, and in February 2026 the court vacated the order at their request, so it is not precedent. It remains a public record of how an automated flag, and a claim that someone reviewed it, can be wrong.

That is why our attorneys never accept a CyberTip at face value. We check whether each file was actually reviewed, whether it was labeled “apparent” or only “unconfirmed,” and whether an independent examiner agrees the image shows a minor at all. A person who has been falsely flagged has a defense, and the first step is to say nothing to investigators and call a lawyer.

What does the State have to prove about knowledge?

The State must prove you knowingly possessed, controlled, or intentionally viewed material you knew contained CSAM. Under section 827.071, Florida Statutes, the file’s presence on a device is not enough by itself. When the device or home is shared, Florida applies constructive possession rules: the State must show you knew of the files and could exercise control over them through evidence beyond mere proximity, as the Second District explained in Jenrette-Smith v. State, 114 So. 3d 427 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013).

Forensic evidence decides most knowledge disputes. Our attorneys retain independent digital forensic examiners to answer questions the State’s report often skips:

1. Who was using the device? Login records, user profiles, and activity at the time of download.
2. Were the files ever opened? Access dates, thumbnails, and viewing history.
3. Where did the files sit? A deleted file, a cache, or an automatic sync folder tells a different story than an organized collection.
4. How did they arrive? Bulk downloads, file-sharing programs, malware, or a synced account a user never opened.
5. Are the counts right? Duplicates, thumbnails of the same image, and files of uncertain age inflate the count.

Deleted files raise their own issue. In Burnett, the State’s expert found deleted images on diskettes but could not say when or by whom they were deleted. The Second District resolved the case on the warrant and expressly left open whether deleted images retrievable only by an expert prove knowing possession. Our attorneys press that question when the evidence is deleted or fragmentary. Because constructive possession works the same way across offenses, our guide to constructive possession in Florida is useful background.

What changed in Florida’s CSAM law on July 1, 2026?

On July 1, 2026, Chapter 2026-20, Laws of Florida (CS/CS/HB 1159), renamed “child pornography” as “child sexual abuse material” throughout the statutes and raised several penalties. Possessing, controlling, or intentionally viewing CSAM under section 827.071(5) became a second-degree felony, and each image and each child depicted is still a separate offense. Our post on child pornography penalties in Florida covers sentencing, scoring, and the image-count enhancement in detail. The changes that most affect defense strategy are these:

The transmission change builds on earlier law about file sharing. Section 847.0137 reaches a person who knew or reasonably should have known he was transmitting CSAM. In Jeror v. State, 313 So. 3d 178 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021), a Sarasota County defendant moved downloaded videos into a folder a BitTorrent program shared automatically. The Second District held the evidence let the jury find he reasonably should have known the files were being shared, and affirmed. With cloud links now included, how a folder was shared, and whether the user knew, is a central fact our attorneys investigate.

Can a child pornography charge be dropped or reduced in Florida?

Yes. Charges can be dismissed, reduced, or resolved for fewer counts when the search is suppressed, the knowledge evidence is weak, or mitigation persuades the prosecutor. Counts tied to unreliable forensics can also be dropped. Early work matters most, and when an investigation is still underway, pre-file advocacy can shape what the State files.

One example from our firm: a young man who had just turned 18 was charged with possession of child pornography and faced prison and sexual offender registration. Our attorneys built a detailed mitigation case and negotiated with the prosecutor, and the case resolved with a plea to a non-registerable offense with treatment. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes. Our guide to a mitigation report explains that work, and our overview of sex offender registration in Florida explains what registration under section 943.0435, Florida Statutes requires.

Charges involving chats with a minor are a different offense with different defenses; see solicitation of a child using a computer and what to do if you messaged a minor online. Our Tampa internet crimes attorney page describes how our firm defends these cases.

What should you do if police contact you about a CSAM investigation?

Do not answer questions, consent to a device search, or delete anything; call a defense attorney first. Deleting files after you learn of an investigation can lead to a separate tampering charge and can be argued as evidence of knowledge. Investigators often arrive with a warrant already signed and ask friendly questions while the search happens. Anything said during that visit can supply the knowledge element the forensic evidence lacks.

• Say you want a lawyer and will not answer questions.
• Do not give passwords or unlock devices without advice from counsel.
• Write down who came, what they took, and what they said.
• Keep the warrant and inventory paperwork.

Frequently asked questions about fighting a child pornography charge in Florida

Is accidentally downloading child pornography a crime in Florida?

Not if it was accidental. Section 827.071(5) requires knowing possession or intentional viewing of material the person knew contained CSAM. The Brancato Law Firm uses forensic evidence, such as whether a file was ever opened, to show what a client did and did not know.

Can I be charged if other people used my computer or Wi-Fi?

You can be charged, but shared access is a real defense. On a shared device or network, the State must prove knowledge and control beyond simple proximity to the files. Our attorneys at The Brancato Law Firm build a timeline of who used each device and account when the files arrived.

Is sharing a Google Drive or Dropbox link a crime under Florida’s 2026 law?

Sharing a link or access credential to cloud storage that contains CSAM can now be charged as transmission under section 847.0137, a second-degree felony. The Brancato Law Firm examines whether the client created the link, knew what it contained, and knew it was shared, which is where these cases are won or lost.

Can a CyberTip search be suppressed if no one at Google viewed the file?

It can, in some courts. Several federal appeals courts have held that police violate the Fourth Amendment by opening a hash-matched file no company employee viewed, while others, including the Eleventh Circuit on a record of prior human review, have allowed it. The Brancato Law Firm files private search doctrine motions built on the CyberTip’s file-by-file review answers, a question Florida’s Second District has not settled.

What if a CyberTip flagged an image of an adult?

Then the State cannot prove a key element, because CSAM must depict a minor. Automated tags such as “unconfirmed” signal that even the reporting system was unsure of the person’s age. The Brancato Law Firm retains independent examiners to test age and origin, and cases like Lawshe v. Verizon Communications, Inc., No. 3:24-cv-137-MMH-LLL (M.D. Fla. Feb. 28, 2025) show that these reports can be wrong.

Can a search warrant based on a CyberTip be thrown out?

Yes, if the affidavit lacks probable cause, the information was stale, or police exceeded the scope of the warrant or the private search. In Burnett v. State, 848 So. 2d 1170 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003), a defective affidavit led to reversal of 136 possession counts. Our attorneys at The Brancato Law Firm file motions to suppress when the warrant or the tip falls short.

Does Florida’s July 2026 law apply to my case if the files were downloaded earlier?

The new penalties apply to offenses committed on or after July 1, 2026. When downloads span that date, The Brancato Law Firm uses the forensic timeline to argue which law applies to each count; our internet crimes defense team reviews the file dates in every case.

Will I be arrested before I know I am being investigated?

Often, yes. Many people first learn of a CSAM investigation when police execute a search warrant, sometimes months after the original tip. If you think an investigation is underway, The Brancato Law Firm can step in before charges are filed through representation before charges are filed.

For how The Brancato Law Firm, P.A. defends these cases, see our Tampa sex crimes defense practice.

Talk to our attorneys before you talk to investigators

The first conversation with police and the first forensic image of a device shape everything that follows. The Brancato Law Firm, P.A. was founded by Tampa Criminal Defense Attorney Rocky Brancato, and our attorneys can step in before an interview, review the warrant and CyberTip, and bring in an independent forensic examiner. Call us at any hour at (813) 727-7159 for a confidential consultation. Our firm has Spanish-speaking staff, and attorney Jean-Luc Adrien speaks Spanish, Haitian Creole, and French. Read our guide for Spanish and Haitian Creole speakers facing criminal charges.

For more about our defense strategies, visit our Internet Crimes page.

The Brancato Law Firm, P.A.
620 E. Twiggs Street, Suite 205, Tampa, FL 33602
(813) 727-7159
Serving Hillsborough, Pinellas, and Pasco Counties

The Brancato Law Firm, P.A. is a Tampa-based criminal defense practice. We are not affiliated with any other Brancato-named law firms.

A Florida search warrant comes with a clock, and the date stamped on it can decide a case before anyone looks at the evidence. As a former police academy instructor, I trained officers on how to do things by the book, and as founder of The Brancato Law Firm, P.A., a Tampa criminal defense firm, I have spent more than 25 years in Hillsborough County courtrooms holding them to it. Our attorneys compare the issuance date, the execution date, and the return on every warrant in every case, because a late search can end the prosecution.

What Is Florida’s 10-Day Search Warrant Rule?

The rule is a deadline set by statute. Under section 933.05, Florida Statutes, a search warrant “must be returned within 10 days after issuance, not including the date of issuance.” Courts read that return deadline as an execution deadline: police have to carry out the search within the same 10 days.

The deadline dates back to 1923, and Florida courts enforce it strictly. In Spera v. State, 467 So. 2d 329 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), officers searched a home for drugs 13 days after the warrant issued and found cocaine. The Second District held that “a search warrant in Florida becomes stale ten days after its issuance” and that a stale warrant “requires suppression of any evidence seized as a consequence of the search.”

The 10-day rule still governs warrants for homes, cars, and most physical evidence. The Legislature has carved out longer periods for a few kinds of warrants:

What Happened in Moschella v. State?

In Moschella v. State, 413 So. 3d 851 (Fla. 2d DCA 2025), the Second District reversed a child pornography conviction because a forensic search warrant was executed weeks late. Detectives from the Manatee County Sheriff’s Office seized two phones, a tablet, and a laptop. A judge issued a warrant to search the devices on July 27, 2020, but the detective admitted the search did not happen until “sometime in September.”

James Moschella pleaded no contest and reserved the right to appeal the denial of his motion to suppress. The State stipulated that the suppression issue was dispositive, meaning the case could not go forward without the evidence. The trial court had denied suppression because the delay did not prejudice him.

The Second District disagreed. Quoting Spera, it said “the legislature has decided that ten days is a reasonable time,” and it refused to add a prejudice requirement to “the firmly established statutory time limit.” Because the State’s stipulation was binding, the court reversed the judgment and sentences and remanded for dismissal of the charges.

Moschella matters in Tampa Bay for a specific reason. The Second District Court of Appeal hears appeals from Hillsborough, Pinellas, and Pasco Counties, so its rulings bind the trial judges our clients appear before.

Did Florida Change the Search Warrant Rule for Phones and Computers?

Yes, twice. A 2025 law gave police 45 days to return a warrant for a computer or electronic device already in police possession. Then the Legislature passed CS/HB 359, signed June 26, 2026 and effective July 1, 2026 as chapter 2026-177, Laws of Florida. Under the current statute, a device warrant is “considered timely executed” if police seize the device within 10 days, the return is due within 365 days, and the agency does not have to finish its forensic analysis within the return period.

The House Criminal Justice Subcommittee’s staff analysis of HB 359 discussed Moschella directly, and the bill responds to the problem the case exposed: forensic exams of phones and computers take longer than 10 days.

The change does not make device warrants deadline-free. The device still has to be seized within 10 days of the warrant, and the return still has a deadline. It also leaves open which version of the statute applies to a warrant issued before July 1, 2026. Our attorneys check the issuance date against the version of section 933.05 in effect that day, and we raise Moschella wherever the older rule governed.

Why Do Warrant Deadlines Matter So Much in Child Pornography Cases?

They matter because these cases usually rest entirely on what a forensic examiner finds on a seized device. Under section 827.071, Florida Statutes, knowingly possessing child sexual abuse material is a second-degree felony, and each image, and each child in each image, is a separate offense. A single phone can produce dozens of counts, each punishable by up to 15 years in prison.

Federal numbers show how heavily these cases are prosecuted. The U.S. Sentencing Commission’s Quick Facts on child pornography offenses report that 1,432 people were sentenced for these offenses in federal court in fiscal year 2025, with an average sentence of 118 months. The Middle District of Florida, which includes Tampa, sentenced 70 of them, among the most of any district in the country.

When the search that found the files was invalid, the files cannot be used. That is why a warrant timing problem can end a case that looks unbeatable. Our Tampa internet crimes attorney team treats the warrant file as the first piece of evidence to examine.

How Do Defense Attorneys Find a Late Warrant?

They line up the dates in the paperwork. The warrant shows when a judge signed it. The return and inventory show when officers executed it and what they took. Forensic reports, property receipts, and lab request forms often show when the device search actually started. Moschella’s case turned on a detective’s admission at the suppression hearing, so depositions matter too.

Our attorneys check these points in every case involving a search warrant:

1. Issuance date. The day the judge signed the warrant, which starts the clock the next day.
2. Execution date. When officers searched the place or seized the device.
3. Return date. When the warrant and inventory went back to the court.
4. Forensic start date. When the examiner began the device search, from lab logs and reports.
5. Applicable statute. Which version of section 933.05 was in effect on the issuance date.

Do Other Warrant Problems Lead to Suppression?

Yes. A late warrant is only one of several grounds for a motion to suppress in a digital evidence case. A warrant may lack probable cause, describe the place or files too broadly, or be searched beyond its scope. In Smallwood v. State, 113 So. 3d 724 (Fla. 2013), a Jacksonville robbery case, the Florida Supreme Court held that police could take a phone during an arrest but needed a warrant before searching its data, and it ordered a new trial because the photos found on the phone should have been excluded.

Many child exploitation investigations begin before any warrant, with a tip from a tech company and a subpoena for account records. Our guide to a Google account legal request in Florida explains that stage. If you suspect an investigation, representation before charges are filed can keep you from consenting to a search that no warrant would have allowed.

How Soon Should You Talk to a Lawyer After a Device Seizure?

Talk to a lawyer right away, ideally before the forensic exam is finished. Dates and chain-of-custody records are easiest to pin down early, and a lawyer can demand the warrant, the return, and the lab paperwork through discovery and take depositions before memories fade. For the charges and sentencing exposure in these cases, see our pages on child pornography defense in Tampa and child pornography sentencing enhancements.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does a late search warrant always get a case dismissed in Florida?

No. A late warrant leads to suppression of the evidence from that search, and dismissal follows only when the State cannot prove the case without it, as happened when the State stipulated in Moschella. The Brancato Law Firm evaluates what evidence would remain after suppression before advising a client on a plea or trial, as explained on our Tampa sex crimes lawyer page.

Do I have to prove the delay hurt my case?

No. The Second District held in Moschella that a defendant does not have to show prejudice from a late warrant, because the Legislature already decided what a reasonable time is. Our attorneys at The Brancato Law Firm raise the deadline issue on its own terms rather than trying to show harm.

How many days do police have to search my phone under a warrant in Florida?

Under the current section 933.05, police must seize the phone within 10 days of the warrant, and the return is due within 365 days. The Brancato Law Firm checks whether an older version of the statute, with a shorter deadline, applied to your warrant, using the statute itself on Online Sunshine.

What is a dispositive plea, and why did it matter in Moschella?

A dispositive plea is a no contest plea that reserves the right to appeal a pretrial ruling the parties agree will decide the case, so a win on appeal ends in dismissal instead of a new trial. Our team at The Brancato Law Firm uses this tool when a suppression ruling is strong enough to carry an appeal.

Can child pornography charges be dropped in Florida?

Yes. Charges can be dropped or dismissed when key evidence is suppressed, when the State cannot prove the person knowingly possessed the files, or when the files were on a device others used. The Brancato Law Firm attacks each of those points, and our Tampa internet crime lawyer attorneys handle these cases in Hillsborough, Pinellas, and Pasco Counties.

Does the 10-day rule apply to search warrants for my house or car?

Yes. Warrants for homes, vehicles, and physical items still must be executed and returned within 10 days, as in Spera, where a home search on day 13 required suppression. The Brancato Law Firm reviews every warrant in a case, not only the device warrant, because one late search can taint the evidence that followed.

Talk to a Tampa Defense Attorney About a Search Warrant

The dates on a warrant do not change, but the chance to use them can slip away once a plea is entered. Our attorneys at The Brancato Law Firm, P.A., founded by Tampa Criminal Defense Attorney Rocky Brancato, will review every warrant, return, and forensic report in your case for timing and scope problems. Call (813) 727-7159; you can call us at any hour, and our office is two blocks from the courthouse. Our firm has Spanish-speaking staff, and attorney Jean-Luc Adrien speaks Spanish, Haitian Creole, and French. Read our guide for criminal defense in Spanish and Haitian Creole in Tampa.

For more about our defense strategies, visit our Tampa Internet Crimes Attorney page.

The Brancato Law Firm, P.A.
620 E. Twiggs Street, Suite 205, Tampa, FL 33602
(813) 727-7159
Serving Hillsborough, Pinellas, and Pasco Counties

The Brancato Law Firm, P.A. is a Tampa-based criminal defense practice. We are not affiliated with any other Brancato-named law firms.

If you opened an email from Google saying it received legal process about your account, an investigation has already reached your data, and what you do in the next few days matters. I’m Rocky Brancato, founder of The Brancato Law Firm, P.A., a Tampa criminal defense firm, and in more than 25 years in Hillsborough County courtrooms, including my years in the Major Crimes Unit, I have seen how many serious cases begin with a subpoena to a tech company. Today our attorneys take these notices from the other side: we call the agency, learn what it wants, and work to keep the case from ever being filed.

What Does a Google Legal Process Notice Mean?

It means a government agency served Google with legal process for information tied to your account, and Google is telling you about it. Google’s published policy on how it handles government requests for user information says it emails the user before disclosing information unless the law prohibits notice, the account is disabled or hijacked, or an emergency, such as a threat to a child’s safety, justifies waiting. When the gag order or emergency ends, Google sends the notice.

That last point explains why many notices arrive late. The data may have been produced long before you heard about it. Other companies, including Apple, Microsoft, Meta, and Amazon, send similar notices under their own policies.

Florida law follows the same pattern. Under section 934.25, Florida Statutes, officers can delay notice to a subscriber for up to 90 days at a time, with 90-day extensions, if notice might lead to flight, destroyed evidence, witness intimidation, danger to someone’s safety, or a seriously jeopardized investigation. A court can also order the provider not to tell anyone for “such period as the court deems appropriate.” The federal version, 18 U.S.C. § 2705, works the same way for federal agencies.

Is a Google Legal Request Email a Scam?

Usually not, but verify it without clicking anything. Real notices come from Google’s own domain and name an agency or court, while fake ones ask for passwords, payment, or a phone call to a number in the email. Sign in to your Google account directly through a browser, not through a link, and do not reply to the message. Then forward the notice to your attorney, who can confirm it with the agency.

What Legal Process Can Police Use to Get Your Google Data?

The type of legal process depends on what the government wants. Under section 934.23, Florida Statutes, a Florida officer can get basic subscriber records with a subpoena: your name, address, session times, length of service, payment method, and assigned IP addresses. Officers who get records this way do not have to notify you at all. Recent stored content, such as emails held 180 days or less, requires a warrant from a judge.

Google’s policy tracks the same tiers for U.S. requests: a subpoena for basic subscriber information and certain IP addresses, a court order for other non-content records in criminal cases, and a search warrant for content. Professor Orin Kerr’s widely cited article, “A User’s Guide to the Stored Communications Act, and a Legislator’s Guide to Amending It,” 72 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 1208 (2004), explains how this tiered system lets the government get more data with less judicial review when it asks for records instead of content.

Courts have pushed the warrant line outward. In United States v. Warshak, 631 F.3d 266 (6th Cir. 2010), a federal fraud case, the Sixth Circuit held that the government “may not compel a commercial ISP to turn over the contents of a subscriber’s emails without first obtaining a warrant based on probable cause.” In Carpenter v. United States, 585 U.S. 296 (2018), the U.S. Supreme Court required a warrant for historical cell site location records. When the State skipped a required warrant, our attorneys file a motion to suppress.

Why Would Police Want Your Google Account?

Police want an account because it holds evidence about someone, and that someone is not always the account owner. Account requests usually fall into a few groups:

• Child exploitation tips. Providers scan uploads and report suspected child sexual abuse material to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, which routes the tip to local police.
• Fraud and scams. Account, payment, and login records are central to wire fraud, identity theft, and investment fraud cases.
• Threats, stalking, and harassment. Messages, posts, and IP logs can identify who sent them.
• Drug cases. Messages and location history can show transactions and meetings.
• Someone else’s conduct. A family member on your Wi-Fi, a hacked account, or contact with a suspect can put your account in the file.

Internet crime reports are heavy in Florida. The FBI Internet Crime Complaint Center 2024 report counted 52,191 complaints from Florida in 2024, the 3rd most of any state, with reported losses of $1,071,909,632. Each complaint is a possible subpoena to a tech company.

How Does an Account Request Turn Into an Arrest?

It usually follows a set path: a tip or complaint, a subpoena for subscriber information, a visit to the home, and then a search warrant. A Second District case from nearby Manatee County shows each step. In State v. McNeela, No. 2D2022-1418 (Fla. 2d DCA June 21, 2023), Microsoft reported suspected child pornography uploaded from a Sarasota IP address. A detective subpoenaed the internet provider, which returned the account holder’s name, phone number, and address. Officers went to the house, the man told them he was the computer’s primary user, and he consented to a search. The court reversed an order suppressing the evidence and held that those facts were enough for a search warrant.

The lesson is about the knock on the door. The subpoena gave police a name and address. The conversation and the consent gave them the rest. A lawyer who is already on the case before that visit can tell the agency that you will not be interviewed and will not consent to a search.

What Should You Do After Getting a Google Legal Request Notice?

Take five steps, in this order:

1. Do not contact the agency yourself. Anything you say can be used to build probable cause, and calling to “clear it up” is how many cases are made.
2. Do not delete data or the account. Deleting can be charged as tampering with evidence, and the provider has often preserved a copy already.
3. Do not discuss the notice. Texts, emails, and calls with friends or family are not privileged and can be subpoenaed too.
4. Save the notice and secure your devices. Keep the original email, change passwords on shared devices, and note who else uses your Wi-Fi or accounts.
5. Call a defense attorney. Your lawyer can contact the agency, learn whether you are a target or a witness, and speak for you from that point forward.

How Can a Lawyer Help Before Charges Are Filed?

A lawyer can often learn what the investigation is about and stop it from growing. Our attorneys contact the investigating agency directly and tell it that you are represented, so detectives must go through us and cannot question you on your doorstep. We work to find out which agency served the process, what data it got, whether the case is open or closed, and whether you are a suspect or a witness. Some clients learn they were only a witness, and that answer alone ends weeks of worry.

When the risk is real, we advocate with investigators and the prosecutor before a filing decision is made. Our firm offers this representation before charges are filed for a separate flat fee, and that fee is credited toward the full defense fee if a case is later filed and you keep us on it. If the request involves an online sex offense, our Tampa internet crimes attorney page explains how we defend those cases.

How Soon Should You Act on an Account Notice?

Act right away, within days. Because notice can be delayed for months, the investigation may be far along when the email arrives, and the next step could be a search warrant for your home. In Hillsborough, Pinellas, and Pasco Counties, our attorneys contact the investigating detective as soon as we know the agency, because an early call is the best chance to shape what happens next. Our Hillsborough County criminal defense attorneys handle these calls with HCSO, Tampa PD, and federal agencies.

For more on how digital evidence is gathered and challenged, see our posts on social media evidence in Tampa criminal cases and cell phone location evidence, and our guide to geofence warrants and the Chatrie case.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does a Google legal process notice mean I am being charged with a crime?

No. A notice means an agency obtained or sought your data, not that a charge has been filed, and many people who get one are witnesses or account holders whose network someone else used. The Brancato Law Firm contacts the agency to find out where you stand, as described on our pre-file advocacy page.

Why did I get the notice months after Google gave police my data?

A court or a supervising officer probably delayed the notice, which Florida’s section 934.25 allows for up to 90 days at a time with extensions. Our attorneys at The Brancato Law Firm treat a late notice as a sign the investigation is advanced, because Google sends it only after the delay ends.

Can I ask Google or a court to stop the disclosure?

Sometimes, if the data has not yet been produced, a lawyer can ask the agency to narrow the request or move to quash process that is overbroad or lacks the required approval. The Brancato Law Firm reviews the process itself to see whether it met the requirements of section 934.23.

Should I delete my Google account after getting the notice?

No. Deleting data after you know about an investigation can lead to a separate charge for tampering with evidence, and the provider may have preserved a copy anyway. Our team at The Brancato Law Firm advises clients on what to keep and how to protect their devices without creating new problems.

What if someone else used my account or Wi-Fi?

Tell your lawyer, not the police. Shared devices, hacked accounts, and open networks are real explanations, but they must be supported with evidence such as login records and device data before they are raised. The Brancato Law Firm gathers that proof, and our Tampa internet crime defense attorneys use it when an account is wrongly tied to a client.

Can Google account charges be dropped in Florida if a case is filed?

Yes, a filed case can still be dropped. The State Attorney’s Office can decline to prosecute or later dismiss the case (a nolle prosequi) when the account evidence does not prove who used the account, or when the data was obtained without required legal process. The Brancato Law Firm presses those weaknesses with prosecutors and in a motion to suppress when the facts support it.

For how this fits into the rest of a case, see our guide to each stage of a Florida criminal case.

Talk to a Tampa Defense Attorney About an Account Notice

Before a detective knocks on your door, put a lawyer between you and the investigation. Our attorneys at The Brancato Law Firm, P.A., founded by Tampa Criminal Defense Attorney Rocky Brancato, will contact the agency, find out what it has, and speak for you from that point on. Call (813) 727-7159; you can call us at any hour, and our office is two blocks from the courthouse. Our firm has Spanish-speaking staff, and attorney Jean-Luc Adrien speaks Spanish, Haitian Creole, and French. Read our guide for Spanish-speaking criminal defense clients in Tampa.

For more about our defense strategies, visit our Tampa Internet Crimes Attorney page.

The Brancato Law Firm, P.A.
620 E. Twiggs Street, Suite 205, Tampa, FL 33602
(813) 727-7159
Serving Hillsborough, Pinellas, and Pasco Counties

The Brancato Law Firm, P.A. is a Tampa-based criminal defense practice. We are not affiliated with any other Brancato-named law firms.

This article is not affiliated with or endorsed by Google, Apple, Microsoft, Meta, or any law enforcement agency.

I’m Rocky Brancato, founder of The Brancato Law Firm, P.A., a Tampa criminal defense firm. As a former police academy legal instructor, I taught officers exactly when the law allows them through a front door — and I served as Chief Operating Officer of the Hillsborough County Public Defender’s Office, where home-search suppression motions were daily work. Our attorneys litigate these entries in Tampa Bay courtrooms, and 2026 has redrawn several of the lines.

When Can Police Legally Enter Your Home in Florida?

Police can enter your home only with a warrant, with valid consent, or under a recognized exception — because under both the Fourth Amendment and Article I, Section 12 of the Florida Constitution, a warrantless home search is “per se unreasonable.” The home is the most protected place in constitutional law, and the State always bears the burden of proving an exception applied.

Everything below is about how those boxes get tested in real cases — because the difference between “welfare check” and “warrantless search,” or between “we had a warrant” and “here is the warrant,” decided three major Florida decisions within weeks of each other this year.

Can Police Enter Your Home for a Welfare Check?

Only if the facts would make a reasonable officer believe someone inside is seriously hurt or about to be — and a Tampa Bay-area appellate court just held officers to that standard. In State v. Ford, No. 2D2025-0324 (Fla. 2d DCA July 10, 2026), detectives entered a man’s home without a warrant, claiming they feared a medical emergency, and found evidence they hoped to use against him. The trial court suppressed it, finding the officers’ fear was built on “a hunch or a guess or a speculation” — and the Second District, whose decisions bind courts across Hillsborough, Pinellas, and Pasco Counties, affirmed.

The U.S. Supreme Court set the national test for these emergency entries in January 2026. Our guide to Case v. Montana and police welfare checks explains that decision and what officers may search once inside.

What sank the State was the officers’ own behavior. They did not call 911. They did not kick the door or break a window to render immediate aid. They called dispatch for a backup officer — “not with lights and sirens, just regular” — waited, and then went looking for an open window to climb through. None of them looked through the windows to confirm anyone inside actually needed help, and the court found they had plenty of time to get a warrant. The lesson our attorneys use in suppression hearings: exigency is measured by the totality of the circumstances, and officers who act like there is no emergency cannot later justify an entry by claiming one. The emergency-aid exception is real — police genuinely rescuing someone need no warrant — but Ford confirms it is “not a shortcut by which police may circumvent the requirement of a search warrant.”

Do Police Have to Knock and Announce Before a Raid?

Yes — Florida law still requires it — but as of June 2026, breaking that rule no longer gets the evidence thrown out. Florida’s knock-and-announce statute, Fla. Stat. § 933.09, lets officers executing a search warrant break open a door or window only after giving “due notice” of their authority and purpose and being refused admittance. For sixteen years, Florida courts suppressed evidence when officers violated it, under the Florida Supreme Court’s Cable decision.

That ended with State v. Times, No. SC2024-0647 (Fla. June 25, 2026). Officers executing a valid search warrant announced it but did not give the occupants enough time to answer the door before going in; the trial court suppressed the evidence under Cable, and the First District affirmed. On a certified question, the Florida Supreme Court held 6-1 that suppression is not an available remedy for a statutory knock-and-announce violation, receding from Cable. The court reasoned that § 933.09 contains no exclusionary rule of its own, and the Legislature chose a different remedy: under Fla. Stat. § 933.17, an officer who willfully exceeds his authority executing a search warrant — or exercises it “with unnecessary severity” — commits a second-degree misdemeanor. The court noted the U.S. Supreme Court reached the same conclusion for federal constitutional purposes in Hudson v. Michigan back in 2006.

Read carefully, Times is narrower than the headlines suggest. It applies to searches conducted under a valid warrant — the underlying warrant must still survive scrutiny — and the court answered only the § 933.09 question, leaving other doors open. For anyone whose home was raided, the defense analysis simply shifts one step earlier: from how the officers entered to whether the paperwork authorizing entry holds up at all. Which brings us to the third 2026 decision.

What If the State Can’t Produce the Search Warrant?

Then the search is treated as warrantless — and everything found, plus everything you said afterward, can be suppressed. In Cabrera v. State, No. 3D2024-1324 (Fla. 3d DCA May 13, 2026), a detective and federal agents entered a fenced Miami-Dade residential property based on a federal search warrant that was under seal — and when the defense moved to suppress, the State never produced the warrant or its supporting affidavit. The trial court denied suppression anyway, admitting it was “just skipping over” whether the warrant was valid.

The Third District reversed with instructions to grant suppression. A court reviewing a warrant is confined to the four corners of the probable cause affidavit; with no warrant and no affidavit in the record, there was no way to find probable cause — and no way to apply the good-faith exception, because the detective who entered had never even seen the warrant he claimed to rely on. The court went further: because the search was illegal, Cabrera’s post-search statements were “fruit of the poisonous tree” and had to be suppressed too. For defendants, Cabrera is a reminder that “we had a warrant” is a claim the State must prove with paper, not testimony — and that a successful challenge takes down not just the physical evidence but the statements that followed it.

What Evidence Gets Thrown Out After These Decisions?

The 2026 decisions sort home-search defenses into clear lanes — some stronger than ever, one now closed.

One practical note about consent, because it decides more home searches than any doctrine: you are allowed to say no. Officers at your door without a warrant may ask to “take a look around,” and declining is not evidence of guilt. Step outside, close the door behind you if you speak with them, and say clearly that you do not consent to a search. If they enter anyway, do not resist — the remedy is a suppression motion, not a confrontation, and our attorneys would rather litigate a clean record of non-consent than untangle a disputed one.

Can Police Search Your Yard, Porch, or Fenced Property?

The Fourth Amendment’s protection extends beyond your walls to the “curtilage” — the area immediately surrounding the home, like a porch, carport, or fenced yard, where the intimate activity of home life happens. That mattered in Cabrera, where the property agents entered without a producible warrant was a fenced residential lot. The controlling principle comes from a Florida-grown U.S. Supreme Court case: in Florida v. Jardines, 569 U.S. 1 (2013), officers walked a drug dog onto a Miami front porch, and the Court held that bringing an investigative tool into the curtilage to gather evidence is itself a search requiring a warrant.

The practical rules for Tampa Bay homeowners follow from that. Officers, like anyone else, may walk up to your front door, knock, and ask questions — the “knock and talk” — because that is what any visitor may do. What they may not do without a warrant is exceed that implied invitation: linger to peer into windows, walk the back yard, open a gate into a fenced area, or deploy a dog at the threshold. Evidence gathered from inside the curtilage without a warrant, consent, or true exigency is suppressible on the same footing as evidence from inside the house — and in our experience, entries “just to check the back door” are among the most commonly overlooked suppression issues in home-search cases.

What Should You Do If Police Searched Your Home?

Write down everything while it is fresh, and get the paperwork audited by a defense lawyer before the State’s charging decision. The questions that decided Ford, Times, and Cabrera are the questions we ask in every Tampa Bay home-search case: Was there a warrant, and can the State actually produce it and its affidavit? Does the affidavit establish probable cause within its four corners? If there was no warrant, what exception is the State claiming — and did the officers’ actual conduct match the emergency they now describe? Were your statements taken after the entry, so that they fall if the entry falls? In Hillsborough County, felony cases move from arrest to the State Attorney’s filing decision in a matter of weeks, and a suppression problem raised early can shape or stop the filing. These issues also connect to the rest of your digital and physical privacy — see our guides on whether police can track your phone without a warrant, stop and frisk on the street, and what to do after being arrested in Tampa.

For more about our defense strategies, visit our Hillsborough County criminal defense page.

For how this fits into the rest of a case, see our guide to each stage of a Florida criminal case.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can police enter my house if I don’t answer the door?

Not without a warrant, consent, or a genuine emergency. Simply not answering is not an emergency — and in State v. Ford, the Second District affirmed suppression where officers responded to an unanswered door by climbing through a window on nothing more than speculation. If officers have a valid search warrant, however, § 933.09 allows forced entry after they announce and are refused.

Can police come in for a welfare check?

Only when the facts give them an objectively reasonable belief that someone inside is seriously injured or in imminent danger. A true emergency justifies entry without a warrant; a hunch does not, and officers who wait around and search for an open window undercut their own claim of urgency. Our attorneys examine officers’ actual conduct minute by minute in these cases.

If police broke down my door without knocking, will my case be thrown out?

Not automatically — after State v. Times (Fla. 2026), evidence is no longer suppressed for a knock-and-announce violation when officers had a valid search warrant. But the warrant itself must still be valid, and other defects in the entry or the affidavit still support suppression. The Brancato Law Firm, P.A. audits the entire warrant package in every home-search case, because Times moved the fight — it didn’t end it.

Do police have to show me the search warrant?

You are entitled to know they have one, and the State must be able to produce it in court — Cabrera v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2026) suppressed a search where the warrant was sealed and never produced, along with the statements that followed. At your door, don’t physically interfere; note the time, the agency, and what officers say, and call a lawyer immediately.

Can police search my home if my roommate lets them in?

A person with authority over the home can consent to entry of shared areas, but not to spaces exclusively yours, like your private bedroom — and if you are present and object, your refusal generally controls as to you. Consent questions are fact-heavy, and we litigate them regularly in Hillsborough, Pinellas, and Pasco Counties.

Does an arrest warrant let police enter my home?

An arrest warrant lets officers enter the suspect’s own residence when they reasonably believe the person is home — it is not a search warrant for the whole house, and it does not authorize entering someone else’s home without more. Evidence found beyond those limits can be challenged, and The Brancato Law Firm, P.A. handles exactly these motions.

Home-entry law moved three times in 2026 — Cabrera in May, Times in June, Ford in July — and the difference between a suppressed search and an admitted one now turns on details most people never think to write down. If officers entered or searched your home anywhere in Tampa Bay, call the attorneys of The Brancato Law Firm, P.A. — founded by Tampa Criminal Defense Attorney Rocky Brancato — at (813) 727-7159 before the State makes its filing decision. The suppression motion that ends a case is built in its first weeks.

The Brancato Law Firm, P.A.
620 E. Twiggs Street, Suite 205, Tampa, FL 33602
(813) 727-7159
Serving Hillsborough, Pinellas, and Pasco Counties

The Brancato Law Firm, P.A. is a Tampa-based criminal defense practice. We are not affiliated with any other Brancato-named law firms.

If you suspect you’re under criminal investigation in Florida, you’re probably right to pay attention. Police contact with friends or family, a request to “come in and talk,” a notification from Google or Apple about a government data request, surveillance, or a search warrant can all signal that law enforcement is building a case.

At The Brancato Law Firm, we handle cases across the full spectrum of criminal investigations, from sex crime anddrug investigations to domestic violence accusations and internet sting operations. Our founder, Rocky Brancato, spent 25 years in criminal defense, including serving as Chief Operations Officer of the Hillsborough County Public Defender’s Office and training law enforcement officers at the police academy on criminal procedure and courtroom testimony. That background gives our team a direct understanding of how investigations are built, how officers are trained to develop cases, and where the real opportunities for defense begin.

The window between investigation and formal charges is often the most valuable time to act in a Florida criminal case. This article covers the signs that an investigation may be underway, what each sign tells you about where things likely stand, and what you can do to protect yourself before charges are ever filed.

How Criminal Investigations Work in Florida Before Charges Are Filed

Most people assume a criminal case starts with an arrest. In reality, many Florida cases begin with a pre-file investigation that can last weeks or months before a prosecutor decides whether to file formal charges.

During this window, law enforcement and prosecutors have broad investigative authority. Under Florida Statute §27.04, state attorneys can summon witnesses from anywhere in the state, question them under oath, and investigate potential violations of law before any charging document is filed. State-attorney investigators have law-enforcement status and can serve arrest warrants, search warrants, and witness subpoenas connected to criminal investigations (§27.255).

For more serious cases, Florida prosecutors can also convene a grand jury. Grand jury proceedings are secret, and the grand jury has the power to subpoena witnesses, hear testimony, and return an indictment. If you are called before a grand jury, Florida law allows you to bring one attorney into the room, but only to advise and consult, not to speak to the grand jurors (Florida Statutes Chapter 905).

Florida’s public records law classifies active criminal investigative material as nonpublic while the investigation is ongoing with a reasonable, good-faith anticipation of arrest or prosecution (§119.011). You may receive very little official confirmation that an investigation exists, even when one is well underway.

All of this matters because the pre-file stage is where defense intervention can have the greatest impact. Once formal charges are filed, the case takes on its own momentum. Before that point, there is an opportunity to present evidence, provide context, and advocate directly to the prosecutor’s office to prevent charges from being filed in the first place.

Common Signs That You May Be Under Investigation

Law Enforcement Asks You to “Come In and Talk”

A request for a “voluntary interview” or an invitation to “clear something up” is one of the clearest signs that investigators consider you a person of interest. These conversations are designed to develop evidence, not to help you.

What makes this risky in Florida: Miranda warnings are only required during custodial interrogation, not during every police conversation. The Florida Supreme Court has held that the trigger for Miranda protections is whether the person is in custody, not whether they are a suspect (Traylor v. State). A noncustodial interview at a police station can produce statements that are fully admissible at trial, even if you were never read your rights.

What this sign tells you about where things stand: Investigators believe you may provide information that helps their case. They would not ask if they didn’t think the conversation could be productive for the prosecution.

What to do: Do not agree to speak without an attorney present. The fact that the conversation is described as “voluntary” does not mean your statements can’t be used against you.

People Around You Are Being Contacted

When law enforcement begins interviewing your family members, co-workers, neighbors, or friends, this typically means investigators are corroborating facts they already believe to be true. This is not usually the beginning of an inquiry. It’s a sign the investigation has progressed to the point where detectives are building context around information they’ve already gathered.

Florida law expressly recognizes that investigator and informant reports are part of criminal investigative information (§119.011), and state attorneys can formally summon witnesses for questioning under oath (§27.04).

What this sign tells you about where things stand: The investigation is past the initial stages. Investigators are testing their theory of the case against what the people in your life can confirm or deny.

What to do: Do not contact these individuals to coordinate stories, ask them what they said, or encourage them not to cooperate. Florida law criminalizes tampering with or harassing a witness, victim, or informant under §914.22.

You Receive a Subpoena or Prosecutor Summons

A subpoena or a summons from the State Attorney’s Office is a stronger signal than a phone call or a detective’s visit. It means someone with legal authority has decided your testimony or records are relevant enough to compel production.

If the subpoena is connected to a grand jury, the secrecy rules are strict. Grand jury proceedings are confidential under Florida law, though a witness may bring one attorney into the room to advise and consult (§905.17, §905.185).

What this sign tells you about where things stand: The investigation has moved into formal evidence-gathering. Prosecutors are actively evaluating whether to bring charges.

What to do: Contact a criminal defense attorney before responding. An attorney can help you understand the scope of the subpoena, whether you are a target or a witness, and how to protect your rights.

A Search Warrant Is Executed or Your Devices Are Seized

A search warrant means a judge has already found probable cause to believe evidence of a crime will be found in a specific location. Under Florida law (Chapter 933), warrants require probable cause, sworn testimony, and a description of the specific place to be searched and items to be seized. Florida imposes additional statutory protections for searches of private dwellings (§933.18).

The Florida Supreme Court has also placed constitutional limits on newer investigative techniques. In Jardines v. State, the court held that a drug-detection dog sniff at the front door of a private home constitutes a search requiring probable cause. In Tracey v. State, the court held that real-time cell-site tracking is a search that requires probable cause.

Device seizures are increasingly common and can involve phones, computers, tablets, external drives, and cloud-connected devices. The Florida Department of Law Enforcement’s forensic laboratories receive more than 100,000 items of evidence per year, and digital-evidence analysts routinely deal with encryption, deleted-data recovery, and damaged devices.

What this sign tells you about where things stand: The investigation is well developed. A judge has already reviewed evidence and concluded there is probable cause. This does not mean charges will definitely be filed, but the case is serious.

What to do: Do not interfere with the search. Do not attempt to hide, destroy, or move any items. Note the names of the officers, the warrant number if visible, and what is taken. Contact an attorney immediately.

You Receive a Notification from Google, Apple, Microsoft, or Meta

This is a sign that most articles about criminal investigations don’t mention. But it’s one of the most concrete, modern indicators that law enforcement has served legal process on a technology company holding your data.

Each of these companies has a policy of notifying users when the government requests account data, unless a court order, law, emergency circumstances, or nondisclosure order prevents notification:

• Google generally emails users before disclosing information to a government agency unless notice is legally prohibited, delayed by a gag order, or blocked by an emergency
• Apple notifies customers when account information is sought unless a court order or similar exception applies, and describes delayed notice after nondisclosure periods
• Microsoft provides prior notice unless prohibited by law, and delayed notice when nondisclosure orders expire
• Meta notifies users before disclosure unless prohibited or subject to nondisclosure, with delayed notice when restrictions lift

What this sign tells you about where things stand: Legal process (a warrant, court order, or subpoena) has already been served on a company that holds your data. The notification may arrive before, during, or after the disclosure, depending on whether a nondisclosure order was in place. You may not be the target of the investigation. You could be a witness, victim, or associated account holder. But it means the investigation is real and involves your digital information.

What to do: Preserve the notification. Do not delete or purge the account. Contact an attorney who can evaluate what process was served, what data may have been disclosed, and whether any challenge or strategic response is available. At The Brancato Law Firm, we handle internet crime and digital evidence cases where tech company notifications are the first sign a client receives that an investigation exists.

You Notice Signs of Surveillance

Surveillance can take many forms: unfamiliar vehicles near your home or workplace, the sense that you’re being followed, unusual activity on your phone or accounts, or the feeling that someone is monitoring your movements.

Florida law treats ordinary observation in public spaces differently from more invasive surveillance methods. The Florida Supreme Court has placed constitutional limits on certain techniques. Real-time cell-site location tracking requires probable cause (Tracey v. State), and a drug-detection dog sniff at the front door of a home is a search requiring probable cause (Jardines v. State).

Florida’s wiretap law (Chapter 934) prohibits the intentional interception of wire, oral, or electronic communications unless a statutory exception applies. Authorized interceptions require a detailed written application explaining the target offense, the communications to be intercepted, and why less intrusive methods failed or would be too dangerous (§934.09).

Not every suspicious car or strange feeling constitutes surveillance. But if multiple signs on this list are happening at the same time, the possibility becomes harder to dismiss.

What this sign tells you about where things stand: If actual surveillance is occurring, the investigation has likely been approved at a supervisory level and may have judicial authorization. This typically indicates a more advanced stage of investigation.

What to do: Document what you observe (dates, times, descriptions) but do not confront anyone you suspect of conducting surveillance. Do not attempt counter-surveillance. Share your observations with your attorney.

Someone Approaches You with a Suspiciously Convenient “Opportunity”

If someone you don’t know well, or someone you do know who is acting out of character, presents you with an unsolicited opportunity to engage in illegal activity, you may be the subject of an undercover operation or sting.

Florida law explicitly addresses this through its entrapment statute (§777.201). Entrapment occurs when law enforcement or its agents induce or encourage a crime by methods that create a substantial risk that the offense will be committed by someone not otherwise ready to commit it. Florida courts apply both subjective entrapment (looking at inducement and predisposition) and objective entrapment (looking at whether police conduct was outrageous).

Undercover operations and controlled buys are common in drug investigations, and online sting operations are a frequent tool in internet crime and sex crime investigations.

What this sign tells you about where things stand: An undercover approach means the investigation is active and may be targeting you specifically. Law enforcement has allocated resources and personnel to the operation.

What to do: Do not engage. Do not participate in the proposed activity. Do not agree to anything “just to see what happens.” Contact an attorney.

What You Should NOT Do If You Think You’re Being Investigated

Recognizing the signs matters, but what you do next matters just as much. These are the most common mistakes people make when they suspect an investigation is underway.

Every one of these actions can create additional criminal exposure on top of whatever the original investigation involves. The instinct to “clean up” or “get ahead of it” without legal guidance is understandable, but it almost always makes things worse.

What a Criminal Defense Attorney Can Do Before Charges Are Filed

Many people assume they need to wait until they’re arrested or formally charged before hiring an attorney. That assumption costs people cases.

Pre-file advocacy is one of the most effective services a criminal defense attorney can provide. In the window between an investigation and a charging decision, a defense attorney can:

• Control contact with law enforcement. Once you have counsel, investigators must communicate through your attorney. This prevents the kind of unguarded statements that frequently become the prosecution’s strongest evidence.
• Determine the scope of the investigation. Your attorney can find out whether subpoenas, warrants, or data requests have been issued and what agency is conducting the investigation.
• Prepare you for a grand jury appearance. If you receive a grand jury subpoena, your attorney can help you understand your rights, prepare your testimony, and accompany you into the grand jury room as your advisor.
• Present evidence and context to the prosecutor. This is the core of pre-file advocacy. An experienced defense attorney can provide exculpatory evidence, witness statements, and contextual information directly to the State Attorney’s Office before a filing decision is made.
• Advocate for a no-file decision. Florida prosecutors sometimes review completed investigations and decide not to file charges. “Not filed on” is a recognized official outcome in the State Attorney’s system. While there is no public data quantifying how often defense-generated pre-file submissions lead to this result, the mechanism is real and well-established.

Pre-file advocacy requires an attorney who understands how the State Attorney’s Office evaluates cases and what evidence influences charging decisions. At The Brancato Law Firm, our system-level knowledge of the criminal justice system, built through years of institutional leadership at the Hillsborough County Public Defender’s Office, gives us direct insight into how these decisions are made.

This approach is especially effective in domestic violence cases, where the evidence often tells a more complex story than the initial accusation suggests, and in sex crime investigations, where early intervention with detectives can shape the entire trajectory of the case.

How Long Do Florida Criminal Investigations Last?

There is no single answer. Investigation timelines vary depending on the type of case, the complexity of the evidence, and how many agencies are involved.

If you have already been arrested but not formally charged, Florida’s rules set specific deadlines. Under Rule 3.134, the State must file formal charges within 30 days if you are in custody, or within 60 days if you are on pretrial release. If those deadlines pass, the rule requires release on recognizance (on the 33rd or 63rd day, respectively), though limited extensions are available.

If you have not been arrested, there is no comparable deadline. The investigation can remain “active” as long as arrest or prosecution is reasonably anticipated. This is another reason early attorney involvement matters: without counsel monitoring the situation, you may not know the investigation has progressed until an arrest warrant is executed.

For how this fits into the rest of a case, see our stage-by-stage guide to the Florida criminal case process.

For how The Brancato Law Firm, P.A. defends these cases, see our pre-file representation before charges are filed.

If You Recognize These Signs, Talk to an Attorney Now

The period before charges are filed is not dead time. It is the most important window in many criminal cases. What happens during the investigation, and whether a defense attorney is involved, can determine whether charges are ever filed at all.

If you recognize any of the signs described in this article, do not wait for an arrest. Contact The Brancato Law Firm at (813) 727-7159 for a free, confidential consultation. We serve clients across Hillsborough, Pinellas, and Pasco Counties and are available 24/7 for emergencies.