(b) The judge may indicate in the warrant that the deadline for compliance is earlier than the 15th business day after the date the warrant is served if the authorized peace officer who applies for the warrant makes a showing and the judge finds that failure to comply with the warrant by the earlier deadline would cause serious jeopardy to an investigation, cause undue delay of a trial, or create a material risk of:

(1) danger to the life or physical safety of any person;

(2) flight from prosecution;

(3) the tampering with or destruction of evidence; or

(4) intimidation of potential witnesses.

(c) The service provider shall produce all electronic customer data, contents of communications, and other information sought, regardless of where the information is held and within the period allowed for compliance with the warrant, as provided by Subsection (a) or (b).

(d) A court may find any designated officer, designated director, or designated owner of a company or entity in contempt of court if the person by act or omission is responsible for the failure of the company or entity to comply with the warrant within the period allowed for compliance.

(e) The failure of a company or entity to timely deliver the information sought in the warrant does not affect the admissibility of that evidence in a criminal proceeding.

(f) On a service provider's compliance with a warrant issued under Article 18B.354, an authorized peace officer shall file a return of the warrant and a copy of the inventory of the seized property as required under Article 18.10.

(g) A provider of an electronic communications service or a provider of a remote computing service responding to a warrant issued under Article 18B.354 may request an extension of the period for compliance with the warrant if extenuating circumstances exist to justify the extension. The district judge shall grant a request for an extension based on those circumstances if:

(1) the authorized peace officer who applied for the warrant or another appropriate authorized peace officer agrees to the extension; or

(2) the district judge finds that the need for the extension outweighs the likelihood that the extension will cause an adverse circumstance described by Subsection (b).

Added by Acts 2017, 85th Leg., R.S., Ch. 1058 (H.B. 2931), Sec. 1.02, eff. January 1, 2019.