1:26-mj-00032-1 USA v. Graham
Other MJ Case Initiating Documents ( 1
A search warrant was issued in the case of USA v. Application For A Search Warrant. The warrant was related to a Magistrate Judge Miscellaneous Matter, specifically warrants, applications, and orders. The details of the warrant and the case are currently unknown.
Stage
Active litigation
Timeline
4 events
Coverage
4 articles
Sources
2
A search warrant was issued in the case USA v. Application For A Search Warrant, allowing law enforcement to search for evidence. The warrant was granted by a Magistrate Judge, but the identity of the judge has not yet been disclosed.
This development marks a significant step in the case, which is currently active and ongoing. The search warrant was issued on April 24, 2026, and its terms are not publicly known. The case is being heard in a federal court, but the specific court has not been identified.
The search warrant is part of a larger investigation, and its purpose is to gather evidence for potential prosecution. The case is still in its early stages, and it is unclear what evidence has been collected or what charges may be filed. The search warrant is a key development in the case, and it will likely be the focus of future court proceedings.
The case is currently being overseen by a Magistrate Judge, who will play a key role in guiding the investigation and ensuring that the rights of all parties are protected. As the case moves forward, it is likely that more information will become available about the search warrant and the evidence that has been collected.
The court will continue to issue orders and make decisions that will shape the course of the case. The parties involved will also continue to work together to gather evidence and build their cases.
The outcome of the case is uncertain, but it is clear that the search warrant is a significant development that will have a major impact on the investigation and the potential prosecution. The case is ongoing, and it will be closely watched by observers and the public as it moves forward.
The search warrant is a key part of the case, and it will likely be the focus of future court proceedings.
Magistrate Judge Miscellaneous Matter: Warrants/Applications/Orders
Open original open_in_newMagistrate Judge Miscellaneous Matter: Warrants/Applications/Orders
Open original open_in_newMagistrate Judge Miscellaneous Matter: Warrants/Applications/Orders
Open original open_in_newJuryvine summaries are generated from court records. Expand "Source" on any row to see the underlying filing.
A search warrant was issued in the case of USA v. Graham, with the case number 1:26-mj-00032-1. This warrant is part of the initial documents in a minor case. The details of the warrant are not specified.
A search warrant was issued in the case USA v. Application For A Search Warrant (2:26-mj-00034-1). The warrant was granted by a Magistrate Judge, allowing law enforcement to conduct a search. This development is significant because it gives authorities the legal authority to seize evidence.
A search warrant was issued in the case USA v. Application For A Search Warrant, allowing law enforcement to search for evidence. The warrant was granted by Magistrate Judge 1 in the US District Court for the Eastern District of New York. This development is significant because it gives law enforcement the authority to seize and examine potential evidence.
A search warrant was issued in the case USA v. Application For A Search Warrant (2:26-mj-00032-1). The warrant was granted by a Magistrate Judge, allowing law enforcement to conduct a search. This development is significant because it gives authorities the legal authority to seize evidence.
Other MJ Case Initiating Documents ( 1
Magistrate Judge Miscellaneous Matter: Warrants/Applications/Orders
Magistrate Judge Miscellaneous Matter: Warrants/Applications/Orders
Magistrate Judge Miscellaneous Matter: Warrants/Applications/Orders
Sources tracked
2 outlets · 4 articles
Timeline events
4 records on file
Last updated
4 days, 6 hours ago
Juryvine aggregates docket entries from PACER/CourtListener, press coverage, and GDELT signals. Ingestion timestamps do not appear in the What Changed feed — that reflects real court activity only.