CA2: Failure to make an offer of proof in motion to suppress means denial of the motion

“For starters, Ferrer was not entitled to a hearing on his motion to suppress. The motion, filed by counsel, was unaccompanied by any affidavit to support the charge that Ferrer was subjected to ‘an unlawful police-initiated interrogation.’ Gov’t App’x 2. By contrast, the government’s opposition to the motion to suppress contained a number of affidavits and exhibits. Ferrer filed no reply. Accordingly, by declining to submit any affidavits or exhibits in support of his motion — thus choosing not to rebut the government’s voluminous submissions — Ferrer failed to create a dispute of fact, and as a result, a hearing was not warranted. … Thus, any Sixth Amendment violation at the suppression hearing was entirely harmless, because under these circumstances, no evidentiary hearing was required at all.” United States v. Ferrer, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 10049 (2d Cir. Apr. 5, 2019).*

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

Comments are closed.