                                 CODE OF VIRGINIA

REVIEW BY COURTS (§ 40.1-49.12)

A. No court of the Commonwealth shall have jurisdiction to hear a challenge to
the warrant prior to its return, except as a defense in a contempt proceeding,
unless the owner or custodian of the place to be inspected makes by affidavit a
substantial preliminary showing accompanied by an offer of proof that (i) a
false statement, knowingly and intentionally, or with reckless disregard for the
truth, was included by the affiant in his affidavit for the administrative
search warrant and (ii) the false statement was necessary to the finding of
probable cause. The court shall conduct such expeditious in camera review as the
court may deem appropriate.

B. After the warrant has been executed and returned, the validity of the warrant
may be reviewed either as a defense to any citation issued by the Commissioner
or otherwise by declaratory judgment action brought in a circuit court. In any
such action, the review shall be confined to the face of the warrant and
affidavits and supporting materials presented to the issuing judge unless the
employer whose workplace has been inspected makes by affidavit a substantial
showing accompanied by an offer of proof that (i) a false statement, knowingly
and intentionally, or with reckless disregard for the truth, was made in support
of the warrant and (ii) the false statement was necessary to the finding of
probable cause. The reviewing court shall not conduct a de novo determination of
probable cause, but only determine whether there is substantial evidence in the
record supporting the decision to issue the warrant.

HISTORY: 1987, c. 643; 2014, c. 354.