Affiant and request
Identify the officer, agency context, warrant type, and the judicial request being prepared.
Warrant preparation
Prepare the facts
before the request moves forward.
LeoPen gives officers a structured place to organize the request, target, supporting facts, nexus, timing, source reliability, and particularity for agency and legal review.
The workspace prepares review material; approved forms, agency procedure, prosecutor review, oath requirements, and judicial approval remain outside the software.
What the workspace helps organize
The facts and connections a reviewer needs to inspect
LeoPen gives the officer a structured place to work through the request. It does not supply missing facts or convert an incomplete record into a legal conclusion.
Person, place, or property
Describe what is to be searched or seized with the particularity the officer can support.
Supporting facts
Organize observations, statements, evidence, records, and investigative steps without adding facts.
Nexus
Connect the supplied facts to the place, person, account, device, or property identified in the request.
Timing and staleness
Keep dates, sequence, ongoing conduct, and recency visible for officer and legal review.
Source reliability
Separate firsthand observations, witness information, records, informant material, and other supplied sources.
Preparation sequence
From investigation facts to agency review
- 1
Enter the facts
The officer supplies the information, sources, timing, and requested scope that can be supported.
- 2
Organize the theory
LeoPen groups the facts around nexus, particularity, timing, and source attribution.
- 3
Prepare a working draft
The workspace produces review material, not a signed affidavit or judicial finding.
- 4
Review and revise
The officer, supervisor, prosecutor, agency, and court process remain responsible for the final document.
Current draft safety mode
Unfinished warrant material stays in the signed-in tab
The current workspace intentionally avoids browser-wide persistent storage. Draft facts remain available while the officer navigates within the same signed-in tab, and the browser warns before refresh or close.
- No warrant draft is restored from legacy browser storage.
- A refresh, tab close, logout, or session end can clear unfinished work.
- Durable, agency-scoped persistence is deferred until the authenticated cloud architecture and records rules are approved.
Review boundaries
The legal decision never belongs to the software
- LeoPen does not determine that probable cause exists.
- It does not select the warrant target, scope, charge, or legal theory for the officer.
- It does not replace agency templates, prosecutor review, oath requirements, court rules, or judicial approval.
- Unconfirmed information must not be inserted as though the officer observed or verified it.
- The working draft is not a case record, evidence system, RMS, or final warrant application.
Evaluate the workflow with a synthetic investigation scenario
Walk through fact collection, nexus, timing, source reliability, draft preparation, and the agency review process without using real case information.