CT: A suppression hearing is a search for the truth; reopening not abuse of discretion

A suppression hearing is a search for the truth, too, and the trial court acted within its discretion in permitting the state to reopen its proof. State v. Freeman, 2013 Conn. LEXIS 363 (November 5, 2013).

The search of the rental car was valid by probable cause and consent, and none of the defendants had standing as an authorized driver. United States v. Goode, 550 Fed. Appx. 84 (3d Cir. 2013).*

The search of the rental car was valid for lack of standing. Text messages from a seized cell phone were properly authenticated. [Apparently no motion to suppress the seizure of the text messages was filed.] United States v. Mebrtatu, 543 Fed. Appx. 137 (3d Cir. 2013).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.