Opinion ID: 1311152
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Federal involvement in a state investigation

Text: A search conducted with significant involvement of federal officers must comply with federal law. Federal agents may not circumvent more restrictive federal requirements by arranging for state officers to search under state law. United States v. Moore, 956 F.2d 843, 847 n. 3 (8th Cir.1992) (internal citation omitted). In determining whether there is significant federal involvement, our cases focus not only on the efforts to obtain a warrant, but also on the execution of the warrant. United States v. Tavares, 223 F.3d 911, 915 (8th Cir.2000). In short, federal involvement in a state search may serve to render the search subject to federal procedures. Id. (quoting United States v. McCain, 677 F.2d 657, 662 (8th Cir.1982)). However, where the federal involvement in obtaining the warrant and in executing it was at most negligible, state law applies. United States v. Schroeder, 129 F.3d 439, 443 (8th Cir.1997). In this case, Brewer argues that FBI Special Agent Gentry's involvement in the investigation rendered the searches subject to federal, rather than state, law. Thus, he argues, the warrants issued by a Missouri judge were insufficient because under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41, search warrants should have been sought from a federal judge. The district court did not err in finding that the federal involvement in the investigation was not so significant as to render the investigation federal in nature, and therefore state search warrants were sufficient. Local police officers filed the affidavits and applications for each warrant. Only local officials were present during the second search of the residence. Special Agent Gentry was the only federal officer present during the initial consent search, and he testified that he merely answered technical questions about whether particular items constituted computer media. A federal official's limited provision of technical guidance, without more, is insufficient to render the investigation federal in nature. [4] Schroeder, 129 F.3d at 443. As a result, we affirm the district court's denial of Brewer's motion to suppress on this ground.