Case Dismissal Los Angeles: Illegal Search through Patdown.
One of the ways your criminal attorney in Los Angeles can win your case is by filing a motion to suppress. A motion to suppress the evidence is a formal motion that is filed with the court. A motion to suppress is a request to have the court order suppress the evidence that the police are using to prosecute you. Within the evidence, the government case will fall apart and the prosecutor or the court will dismiss the case.
Under recent case law, Defendant has a right to avoid contacting police and such conduct does not provide reasonable suspicion that “criminal activity is afoot”. People v. Flores, 320 Cal. Rptr. 3d 455 (Cal. 2024). The same case (People v. Flores) holds that presence in a high crime area does not give reasonable suspicion to conduct a police investigation. Flores should be contrasted with Terry v. Ohio where police were allowed to conduct a brief investigatory stop and pat down for weapons. In People v. Flores, the police observed Flores duck behind a car and he was present in a high crime area. In Terry v. Ohio, Terry and a group of three guys were searched after police saw them “casing” a shop.
Los Angeles DUI Attorney and Los Angeles criminal defense attorney should file a motion to suppress the evidence in most of the criminal cases in Los Angeles.
For example, a recent very helpful case of Santos v. Superior Court (154 Cal. App. 3d 1178) can be used in a motion to suppress the evidence under Penal Code 1538.5. If your Los Angeles Criminal defense attorney’s motion to suppress evidence is granted, you should make a motion to dismiss your Los Angeles criminal case. Because Santos is not related to DUI but is related to pat-down, it is rarely can be used to dismiss a DUI in Los Angeles. In Santos v. Superior Court, the court held that the search of the defendant and locating of the contraband on him was an illegal patdown. Santos v. Superior Court is a case is thus similar to Terry v. Ohio, however, unlike Terry v. Ohio, Santos v. Superior Court suppresses the evidence and does not allow police patdown.
In Santos v. Superior Court, the police observed several men at 10 pm in an area of a parking lot that was cordoned off with a street barricaded. The police officers saw three individuals exchanging unknown items and decided to pat them down for weapons after Julio Santos was not able to produce an ID. Los Angeles Criminal Defense Attorney was able to successfully argue suppression of a gun on similar facts. The court in Santos held that merely being alone with a police officer or not possessing an ID is sufficient basis to pat a person down for weapons. The police officer tried to justify the police “stop and frisk” by violation of the “loitering” statute that prohibited standing around a closed business.
If you are charged with a criminal case in Los Angeles, please call Los Angeles Criminal Attorney or Los Angeles DUI Attorney so that we can explain how we can help defend your case. We specialize in any criminal cases in Los Angeles and surrounding counties and will give you a free consultation.
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading...