TN: Codefendant suppressed contents of a camera, but def can’t because no standing

Codefendant succeeded in suppressing photographs from an illegally seized camera. This defendant, however, had no property or privacy interest in the camera and thus no standing. State v. McClancy, 2019 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 473 (Aug 10, 2019).*

State’s notice of appeal of a suppression motion didn’t include the required certification that the suppression order substantially impaired the prosecution. Without it, there’s no appellate jurisdiction. Commonwealth v. Chism, 2019 PA Super 239, 2019 Pa. Super. LEXIS 780 (Aug. 9, 2019).*

This entry was posted in Burden of pleading, Standing. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.