It means he did not sign the application.
The "affiant" is the person who swears or affirms the information stated in the warrant is factual.
So if [RR] says he was not the affiant on a doc bearing his signature, he is implying someone forged his signature on the application.
Except that the person who signs the application IS the affiant of record. The information given in the application is not under oath, nor is the person who provided it. At the application stage of the proceedings, the only neck on the blade is the lawyer who signed the application.
If what you're saying is true, the entire process isn't just convoluted but it flies in the face of actual legal procedure.
In any legal filing… whomever verifies [signs] the petition before the notary is the affiant. The "client" isn't under oath unless they too verify the petition as the declarant.
Nicely done, Anon!
Exactly. That's why the lawyer's neck is the only one on the blade at this point. If he affirms someone else's claim without a declarative statement, then it's his balls [or her ladyballs] in the sling.
The notary has the role of the taker of the affidavit. Completely different role than an affiant.