Just left the morning staff meeting. In following up on a couple cases that started from traffic stops and ended up in Federal District Court. One case resulted from a "California stop" at a stop sign. The other was failure to maintain a single lane, "weaving over the center stripe." Both traffic stops were video recorded, as were the violations. In the two separate cases, both defendants were "bad guys." One had a prior murder conviction and was found with a gun and drugs. The other had priors, I don't know exactly what, but had dope and a gun in the case. The Feds took up both cases on the Armed Career Criminal Statutes.
The defense, in both cases, requested a Rule 41 Hearing or a Suppression hearing. This is a hearing just to test the probable cause of the encounter. If an error is found on the part of law enforcement, according to the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine, the resulting evidence becomes inadmissible
In both cases the Federal Judge found that traffic law had been violated. However, as no other person was actually put in danger the stop was unnecessary or unwarrented. So he fiound for the defendant and the resulting evidence from the traffic stop was not admissible. Both bad guys walked.
My suggestion was refile in a state district court, but since a federal judge had made a finding. Our local DA will not take the cases.
There you have it. Not only does a traffic stop have to be an obvious violation of the law. It now has to endanger another before it is warranted or necessary.
The defense, in both cases, requested a Rule 41 Hearing or a Suppression hearing. This is a hearing just to test the probable cause of the encounter. If an error is found on the part of law enforcement, according to the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine, the resulting evidence becomes inadmissible
In both cases the Federal Judge found that traffic law had been violated. However, as no other person was actually put in danger the stop was unnecessary or unwarrented. So he fiound for the defendant and the resulting evidence from the traffic stop was not admissible. Both bad guys walked.
My suggestion was refile in a state district court, but since a federal judge had made a finding. Our local DA will not take the cases.
There you have it. Not only does a traffic stop have to be an obvious violation of the law. It now has to endanger another before it is warranted or necessary.

Comment