PA: Deciding a motion to suppress on grounds not raised by the defense was an abuse of discretion; state didn’t get to respond

Deciding a motion to suppress on grounds not raised by the defense was an abuse of discretion because the state did not get to raise a defense to it. Commonwealth v. Banks, 2017 PA Super 182, 2017 Pa. Super. LEXIS 426 (June 12, 2017).

The suppression issue was litigated and defendant lost, and then he pled guilty. His plea waived the suppression issue. State v. Stanford, 2017 Del. Super. LEXIS 277 (June 7, 2017).*

This entry was posted in Motion to suppress. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.