Category Archives: Motion to suppress

W.D.Wash.: No evidentiary hearing on motion to suppress without a prima facie showing of some illegality

The defense does not get an evidentiary hearing on a motion to suppress without at least a preliminary showing that some illegality occurred in the search and seizure at issue. Here, defendant can’t show that except by speculation or that … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of proof, Motion to suppress | Comments Off on W.D.Wash.: No evidentiary hearing on motion to suppress without a prima facie showing of some illegality

MI: Failure to appeal drug testing of deliquent’s parents until after refusal to test a year later was waiver

A drug testing and search condition of a delinquent’s parents and home was in effect a year before there was a refusal on Fourth Amendment grounds. The objection comes too late. If the order was unconstitutional, which it might have … Continue reading

Posted in Drug or alcohol testing, Motion to suppress, Plain view, feel, smell | Comments Off on MI: Failure to appeal drug testing of deliquent’s parents until after refusal to test a year later was waiver

D.Me.: New issue in reply brief after motion hearing is waived

Raising a new issue on a motion to suppress in the reply brief is a waiver because the government didn’t get to address it at the hearing. United States v. Young, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 122221 (D. Me. September 1, … Continue reading

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Motion to suppress | Comments Off on D.Me.: New issue in reply brief after motion hearing is waived

N.D.Ga.: Not briefing an argument in a motion to suppress is waiver

There was a hearing on defendant’s motion to suppress. He raised multiple issues. That which were not briefed in the post-hearing brief are deemed abandoned. “Defendant has failed to perfect, delineate the arguments for, or otherwise expound upon the basis … Continue reading

Posted in Border search, Consent, Motion to suppress | Comments Off on N.D.Ga.: Not briefing an argument in a motion to suppress is waiver

SC: Open container conviction wasn’t collateral estoppel to cocaine possession filed in different court from the same stop

Defendant was charged in municipal court with an open container and was convicted after trial. He was also charged in circuit court with crack possession, and the state argued offensive collateral estoppel from losing the prior search claim. The court … Continue reading

Posted in Motion to suppress | Comments Off on SC: Open container conviction wasn’t collateral estoppel to cocaine possession filed in different court from the same stop

WA: Claimants can use motion for return of property seized for serial forfeiture seizures to speed up proceed

Defendant’s vehicle was seized for taking a whitetailed buck out of season. “¶17 The trial court understandably was concerned that by sequentially seizing property, the government could unreasonably deprive people of the use of their property by prolonging proceedings. However, … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Emergency / exigency, Motion to suppress, Uncategorized | Comments Off on WA: Claimants can use motion for return of property seized for serial forfeiture seizures to speed up proceed

VI: Alleged “plain view” of drugs inadequate without a showing that it was “immediately apparent” drugs were there

Defendant had an accident and was being detained because he appeared under the influence. His vehicle was searched, and a plastic bag inside a plastic bag was seen. The prosecution having produced no evidence that the officer had reason to … Continue reading

Posted in Motion to suppress, Plain view, feel, smell, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on VI: Alleged “plain view” of drugs inadequate without a showing that it was “immediately apparent” drugs were there

OR: Ordering defendant out of his house for an FST was a “stop” and detention as a show of authority

Ordering defendant out of his house for a FST was a “stop” and detention under the state constitution because it was a show of authority. State v. Charles, 263 Or. App. ___, 2014 Ore. App. LEXIS 804 (June 18, 2014). … Continue reading

Posted in Inventory, Motion to suppress, Particularity, State constitution, Stop and frisk | Comments Off on OR: Ordering defendant out of his house for an FST was a “stop” and detention as a show of authority

MI: Where lack of consent not in motion to suppress or tried below, it couldn’t be raised on appeal

The motion to suppress was based on a lack of probable cause, but the trial court found consent. On appeal, the lack of consent is challenged, but it wasn’t challenged in the trial court, so it can’t be raised on … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Motion to suppress, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on MI: Where lack of consent not in motion to suppress or tried below, it couldn’t be raised on appeal

E.D.Pa.: Motion for new trial is not the place to relitigate a motion to suppress

A motion for new trial is not the place to relitigate a motion to suppress. Of course it was damaging: most searches are. “Defendant goes to great lengths in his Motion to explain how damaging the evidence seized at Franklin … Continue reading

Posted in Motion to suppress, Standing | Comments Off on E.D.Pa.: Motion for new trial is not the place to relitigate a motion to suppress

KS: Trash pull lacked nexus to house; buying fertilizer not PC for a grow operation

Officers did a trash pull because a person living at the target address bought “perlite soil conditioner and liquid fertilizer from the Green Circle Garden Center.” (They were running LPNs of people buying that stuff.) In the trash bags was … Continue reading

Posted in Good faith exception, Motion to suppress, Nexus, Probable cause | Comments Off on KS: Trash pull lacked nexus to house; buying fertilizer not PC for a grow operation

KY: Judge who signed the SW is not automatically disqualified from hearing the motion to suppress

The judge who signed the search warrant is not automatically disqualified from hearing the motion to suppress by the Canons of Judicial Ethics and the “appearance of impropriety” standard. There might be cases where the facts would support it, but … Continue reading

Posted in Motion to suppress | Comments Off on KY: Judge who signed the SW is not automatically disqualified from hearing the motion to suppress

OH2: Motion to suppress raised legality of stop; error to decide length of detention without notice to state

The motion to suppress addressed only the legality of the stop, and it didn’t mention the post-stop detention. The state was, therefore, not prepared to defend on that ground, and the trial court erred in deciding that ground without notice … Continue reading

Posted in Motion to suppress | Leave a comment