IL: A motion to suppress and a motion for directed finding of NG are fundamentally two different things

Defendant sought a motion to suppress which was actually a motion for directed finding of not guilty. They are different things. People v. Lomeli, 2017 IL App (3d) 150815, 2017 Ill. App. LEXIS 782 (Dec. 15, 2017).

This immigration checkpoint was well known and it was operated constitutionally at the time in question. United States v. Brown, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 205765 (D.Ariz. Oct. 3, 2017),* adopted, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 205535 (D. Ariz. Dec. 13, 2017).*

The search here was a juvenile probation search, and the search was valid by consent of the parent or by the probation search condition which requires the parents be informed of the condition. State v. Council, 2017-Ohio-9047, 2017 Ohio App. LEXIS 5481 (7th Dist. Dec. 13, 2017).*

This entry was posted in Burden of pleading, Immigration checkpoints, Probation / Parole search. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.