Category Archives: Burden of proof

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

N.D.Okla.: Court finds officer mistaken on when consent given, and suppresses

“Fundamentally, the burden of proof for consent is on the government, United States v. Maestas, 2 F.3d 1485, 1491 (10th Cir. 1993), and, as noted above, any ambiguity in the testimony will be resolved against the government. The Court finds … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of proof, Consent, Private search | Comments Off on N.D.Okla.: Court finds officer mistaken on when consent given, and suppresses

CA2: Court lacks “high level of confidence” for inevitable discovery to apply

Here, the search discovering defendant’s illegal firearms violated the Fourth Amendment, but the government argued for inevitable discovery, but the court lacks a “high level of confidence” that the officers would have inevitably discovered it. The government’s argument was essentially … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of proof, Inevitable discovery, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on CA2: Court lacks “high level of confidence” for inevitable discovery to apply

FL3: Trial court erred in not believing a police officer not impeached or contradicted at all

The testimony of the police officer in this case was neither impeached, contradicted, or implausible. It was error for the trial court to reject it and grant the motion to suppress. State v. Ojeda, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 11197 (Fla. … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of proof | Comments Off on FL3: Trial court erred in not believing a police officer not impeached or contradicted at all