CA7: The remedy for an overbroad SW is a motion to suppress, not a motion to dismiss

An alleged overbroad email search warrant is pursued by a motion to suppress, not a motion to dismiss. “The remedy for such Fourth Amendment violations in a criminal proceeding is suppression of the evidence, not dismissal of the indictment or disqualification of the prosecution team. United States v. Morrison, 449 U.S. 361, 366, 101 S. Ct. 665, 66 L. Ed. 2d 564 (1981) (remedy for searches and seizures contrary to Fourth Amendment in criminal proceeding ‘is limited to denying the prosecution the fruits of its transgression’). We deny this challenge.” United States v. Snyder, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 14947 (7th Cir. June 15, 2023).

The trial court didn’t err in not giving an art. 38.23 instruction on illegally obtained evidence of defendant’s DUI arrest for an alleged statutory violation. Johnson v. State, 2023 Tex. App. LEXIS 4213 (Tex. App. – Ft. Worth June 15, 2023);* Bedford v. State, 2023 Tex. App. LEXIS 4220 (Tex. App. –Amarillo June 15, 2023).*

The objections to the R&R merely restate the original arguments and don’t show error. On the merits, there was probable cause anyway. United States v. Glatz, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 104277 (E.D. Tenn. June 15, 2023).*

This entry was posted in Burden of pleading, Exclusionary rule, Motion to suppress. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.