CA8: Even if def’s Mexican confession was obtained by alleged torture, the UN Convention Against Torture doesn’t have a suppression remedy

Defendant was arrested in Mexico and subjected to searches and interrogation which he claimed amounted to torture. Relying on the United Nations Convention Against Torture, he contended it shocked the conscience. There is no authority for the CAT to apply to excluding criminal evidence. In addition, there was no joint venture with the U.S. Defendant was let loose at the border, and he walked into the U.S. and was arrested. United States v. Pierson, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 17446 (8th Cir. July 11, 2023).

Defendant was probably faking sleeping in a car the police thought had been abandoned; it had been parked there for a couple of weeks. The side windows were heavily tinted, and the officer looked through the windshield and saw blunts and the outline of a gun in defendant’s sweat pants. There was reasonable suspicion to get him out of the car. Commonwealth v. Green, 2023 PA Super 121, 2023 Pa. Super. LEXIS 301 (July 11, 2023).*

The trial court erroneously suppressed. “We feel the trial court’s ruling was clearly erroneous. There was probable cause for the detention and subsequent arrest of the defendant. The call to 911 indicated the defendant was acting unruly as he had done on a previous occasion and claimed that he had a weapon. Upon approaching defendant, the officers experienced the defendant becoming defensive and combative and therefore sought to handcuff him for protective reasons. At this point the defendant fought off the handcuffs and bit one of the officers. A search incident to defendant’s arrest revealed the gun.” State v. Falkins, 2023 La. App. LEXIS 1146 (La. App. 4 Cir. June 28, 2023).*

This entry was posted in Due process, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.