Category Archives: Motion to suppress

IA: Reasonable inference owner of car was driving where owner had a suspended DL

It was a reasonable inference that the owner of a vehicle with a suspended license was driving when the vehicle was seen because the officer’s experience [and commonsense by now] shows that persons with suspended licenses continue to drive. That … Continue reading

Posted in Motion to suppress, Prison and jail searches, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on IA: Reasonable inference owner of car was driving where owner had a suspended DL

KY: Deputy in one county could go to another to investigate; no motion to suppress lies for statutory violation, if there even was one

A motion to suppress for a statutory violation doesn’t work in Kentucky absent a constitutional violation to found it on. Here, a deputy from one county crossed into another county to investigate. The statute defendant relies on deals with arrest, … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Exclusionary rule, Motion to suppress | Comments Off on KY: Deputy in one county could go to another to investigate; no motion to suppress lies for statutory violation, if there even was one

D.Kan.: Pro se motion to suppress of represented def doesn’t attach affidavits, say why 4A or statute violated, or cite any law; denied for having counsel

Defendant is represented by counsel, then files a motion to suppress. “Defendant’s pro se motion reflects a misunderstanding of court proceedings. The Defendant fails to specify which search warrant he objects to, fails to provide a copy, or copies, of … Continue reading

Posted in Motion to suppress, Pretext, Standards of review | Comments Off on D.Kan.: Pro se motion to suppress of represented def doesn’t attach affidavits, say why 4A or statute violated, or cite any law; denied for having counsel

D.Minn.: Seeking “four corners review” of affidavit for SW isn’t a proper motion to suppress

A generalized motion to suppress merely seeking “four corners review” of probable cause is insufficient. “Defendant’s failure to specify the basis for his suppression motion and provide any argument in support thereof warrants denial alone.” “Defendant’s motion also fails because … Continue reading

Posted in Motion to suppress, Probable cause | Comments Off on D.Minn.: Seeking “four corners review” of affidavit for SW isn’t a proper motion to suppress

CA10: Code enforcement officer coming to ptf’s door to talk to him didn’t violate curtilage

A city code enforcement officer who came to plaintiff’s door for a couple of minutes to attempt to talk to him about a sign code violation did not violate the curtilage. Clark v. City of Williamsburg, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS … Continue reading

Posted in Curtilage, Franks doctrine, Ineffective assistance, Motion to suppress | Comments Off on CA10: Code enforcement officer coming to ptf’s door to talk to him didn’t violate curtilage

TX3: No “sua sponte duty” in trial court to suppress evidence that the defense didn’t move to suppress

The trial court has no “sua sponte duty” to suppress evidence that the defense didn’t move to suppress. Chila v. State, 2020 Tex. App. LEXIS 10219 (Tex. App. – Austin Dec. 23, 2020). Police along with USMs entered defendant’s place … Continue reading

Posted in Motion to suppress, Protective sweep, Scope of search | Comments Off on TX3: No “sua sponte duty” in trial court to suppress evidence that the defense didn’t move to suppress

CA11: Dist Ct acted within its discretion denying a suppression motion as untimely

Defense counsel waited past the pretrial motions deadline to file a motion to suppress complaining that he needed a state court transcript, but that hearing was long ago. The district court acted within its discretion in denying the motion for … Continue reading

Posted in Good faith exception, Motion to suppress | Comments Off on CA11: Dist Ct acted within its discretion denying a suppression motion as untimely

CA5: Def’s contesting authenticity of jail calls let the govt establish they came from jail

Not a search claim: Admission of jail telephone calls didn’t undermine the presumption of innocence. Defendant wouldn’t stipulate to authenticity so the government had to establish the source of the calls. United States v. Arayatanon, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 35922 … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Motion to suppress, Prison and jail searches, Waiver | Comments Off on CA5: Def’s contesting authenticity of jail calls let the govt establish they came from jail

CA9: Tight handcuffing can be excessive force, but this wasn’t

Tight handcuffing can be excessive force. Here, plaintiff complained, and they were loosened. He had only a slight bruise. That’s normal, and summary judgment was properly granted against that claim. Reyes v. City of Santa Ana, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS … Continue reading

Posted in Excessive force, Motion to suppress, Probable cause | Comments Off on CA9: Tight handcuffing can be excessive force, but this wasn’t

N.D.Ga.: Reissuance of a better SW to Google after a motion to suppress wasn’t unreasonable

As to one challenged search of Google, when the government says it won’t use challenged evidence at trial, the motion to suppress becomes moot. A motion to suppress another search warrant to Google led to reissuance of a search warrant … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Independent source, Motion to suppress | Comments Off on N.D.Ga.: Reissuance of a better SW to Google after a motion to suppress wasn’t unreasonable

CA5: Failure to plead facts in motion to suppress that would justify relief doesn’t require a hearing

The district court didn’t abuse its discretion in denying the motion to suppress without a hearing for failure to plead “facts that would justify relief.” United States v. Smith, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 32024 (5th Cir. Oct. 8, 2020):

Posted in Motion to suppress | Comments Off on CA5: Failure to plead facts in motion to suppress that would justify relief doesn’t require a hearing

D.Idaho: Even if smell of MJ only justifies search of passenger compartment, finding nothing extends it to trunk

Defendant argues that the smell of marijuana during a traffic stop only permitted a search of the passenger compartment of his vehicle. When the officer didn’t find any marijuana there, it was justified to search the trunk. United States v. … Continue reading

Posted in Motion to suppress, Reasonableness, Scope of search | Comments Off on D.Idaho: Even if smell of MJ only justifies search of passenger compartment, finding nothing extends it to trunk

D.Utah: Ex ante motion to suppress before SW executed denied without prejudice; must follow search

Movant has notice of a search warrant not yet executed. Her ex ante motion to quash the search warrant is denied without prejudice. Under Rule 41(h), the motion should be filed after the search occurs. United States v. Richards, 2020 … Continue reading

Posted in Motion to suppress, Warrant execution | Comments Off on D.Utah: Ex ante motion to suppress before SW executed denied without prejudice; must follow search

TN: No right to reconsideration of denial of motion to suppress on transfer to a different trial judge after denial

After the case was transferred to a different judge after denial of a motion to suppress, defendant sought reconsideration of denial of his suppression motion. He didn’t show that there was justification for reconsideration because of new evidence or other … Continue reading

Posted in Motion to suppress | Comments Off on TN: No right to reconsideration of denial of motion to suppress on transfer to a different trial judge after denial

CA11: Officers executing a SW at a house can approach an occupied car parked out front

“The district court did not err by denying Turner’s motion to suppress. Delgado was entitled, ‘without any level of suspicion,’ to approach a car in a dangerous locale with an unknown number of occupants parked near a residence where he … Continue reading

Posted in Motion to suppress, Seizure, Standards of review, Warrant execution | Comments Off on CA11: Officers executing a SW at a house can approach an occupied car parked out front

Cal.: Defense has to put state on notice of issues in motion to suppress

When the defense makes a motion to suppress, it is obligated to put the state on notice as to all the issues. This suppression hearing took nine days, and still the defense claims the state didn’t fully get the issues. … Continue reading

Posted in Motion to suppress | Comments Off on Cal.: Defense has to put state on notice of issues in motion to suppress