![]() ![]() ![]() Crowley, Assistant District Attorney, for the Commonwealth.īROWN, J. Reardon, Committee for Public Counsel Services, with her) for the defendant.Ĭhristina L. Walker, Committee for Public Counsel Services (Cecely A. Abrams, J., in the Supreme Judicial Court for the county of Suffolk, and the appeal was reported by her to the Appeals Court. Dinneen, J.Īn application for leave to prosecute an interlocutory appeal Ĭocaine seized from a vehicle to which the defendant in a criminalĪction had the keys did not fall within the plain view exception to the warrant requirement, where, if not for the improper seizure by the police of the defendant's keys and the subsequent use of those keys by the police, the police would not have been in a position to observe the cocaine therefore, the judge at a pretrial hearing should have suppressed the seizure of the keys as not being incident to the defendant's arrest for drinking in public, and the cocaine as "fruit of the poisonous tree." ĬOMPLAINT received and sworn to in the Brockton Division of the District Court Department on September 10, 1999.Ī pretrial motion to suppress evidence was heard by James F.X. 1, and therefore, the judge at a pretrial hearing should have granted the defendant's motion to suppress the evidence of cocaine, where the keys were not an instrumentality of the crime of drinking in public for which the defendant was arrested or contraband, and where there was no evidence that the keys might have been used as a weapon against the police further, even if the seizure of the keys was proper, the subsequent search was not warranted under the automobile exception to the warrant requirement, where there was no evidence that the defendant was ever seen in proximity to the vehicle or had control of it at any time, there was nothing to warrant the belief that evidence of criminal activity would be found in the vehicle, and cocaine could not be considered an instrumentality of the crime of public drinking. Keys, which led directly to the discovery of cocaine in a vehicle to which the defendant had the keys, violated the defendant's rights under G. ![]() The seizure and subsequent use by police of a criminal defendant's Search and Seizure, Search incident to lawful arrest, 89 NovemFebruPlymouth County Present: BROWN, GREENBERG, & MCHUGH, JJ.įurther appellate review granted, 437 Mass. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |