motion to suppress

blank

Who Goes First?

by

The defense files a motion to suppress evidence in superior court, and the judge sets the matter for a hearing. The parties and their witnesses show up, ready to give testimony and make their arguments. The judge opens court and asks a simple question: “who’s going first, the state or the defense?”

A view I’ve often heard expressed is that the state has to go first, because even though it was the defendant’s motion which prompted the hearing, “the state always has the burden” and the party with the burden goes first.

That’s generally a correct statement about the burden of proof, but the corresponding rule about order of presentation is a little more… flexible.

Read more

blank

State v. Parisi Answers DWI Procedural Riddle

by

Criminal procedure aficionados, close your red books and riddle me this:

A district court judge in a DWI case preliminarily grants a defendant’s motion to suppress. The State appeals to superior court. The superior court affirms the district court’s determination and remands the case for entry of an order suppressing the evidence and dismissing the charges. The district court enters the order. Does the State have the right to appeal?

Read more

blank

The Right to Life, Liberty, and Fifteen Additional Days to Renew Your Registration

by

Before I became a lawyer, I finished everything ahead of time. Term paper? Completed two weeks early. Trip? Packed a week in advance. Taxes? Filed in February. Alas, those days are nearly two decades behind me. Now I squeak in just under the wire with everything I do—including my weekly blog posts. I could proffer a host of reasons, but don’t think I need to so long as I meet the deadline. My modus operandi may explain why I was particularly troubled by the traffic stop in State v. Baskins, ___ N.C. App. ___ (May 17, 2016).

Read more

blank

State v. Miller Confirms that the DWI Motions Statutes are a Hot Mess

by

No, Justice Ervin didn’t use the words hot mess. But anyone who slogs their way through the tortured procedural swamp that led to State v. Miller, __ N.C. __ (March 18, 2016), is bound to agree that the procedures adopted in 2006 for appeals in DWI cases have created a nearly impenetrable bog for the parties involved. I’m going to do my best here to succinctly explain what happened in Miller. Then I’ll share an idea for freeing litigants and judges from the procedural muck in which they are currently mired. 

Read more

blank

Can I Get Some Relief Here?

by

That’s what I said to my husband during the breakfast hour this morning, while I was working as a short-order cook and waitress for three rather demanding customers (our children). To his credit, he complied and asked how he could help. As a result, I not only got relief, but I got to pick the … Read more

blank

A Motion to Suppress a Prior Conviction Isn’t a Collateral Attack

by

You can’t always get what you want But if you try sometimes you might find You get what you need –The Rolling Stones It’s generally understood that a criminal defendant can’t invalidate an old conviction in connection with proceedings on new charges. This is known as the anti-collateral attack rule. Suppose for example that a … Read more

Is the Use of a Blue Light a Show of Authority?

by

Today, the court of appeals decided State v. Baker.  Baker explains when a trial judge is required to make findings of fact when hearing a motion to suppress, and it raises what I think is an interesting search and seizure issue. The facts were as follows.  An officer was on patrol near a nursing facility … Read more

blank

Can I Get a Remedy? Suppression of Chemical Analyses in Implied Consent Cases for Statutory Violations

by

Dan Defendant is charged with and arrested for driving while impaired. He is taken to a law enforcement center for administration of a chemical analysis. At 2:00 a.m., the chemical analyst informs Dan of his implied consent rights, as set forth in G.S. 20-16.2. Dan indicates that he wishes to call a witness. Dan calls … Read more

What’s a Motion to Suppress?

by

There’s a new batch of opinions from the court of appeals today. One is State v. Reavis, a case that raises a question I’ve been asked several times recently in different contexts: what’s a motion to suppress, and how does it differ from a simple objection to the admission of evidence, and from a motion … Read more