The Justice Be Done - Badge
Badge
Seal of the Supreme Court of the United States - Badge
The National Trial Lawyers / Top 100 Trial Lawyers - Badge
Nationally Ranked Superior DUI Attorney 2014 - Badge
JUSTIA 10 - Badge
State Bar of Arizona - Badge
Lead Counsel Rated - Badge
National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers NACDL Member - Badge
Avvo Client's Choice Award 2017 / DUI 2017 - Badge
National College for DUI Defense / General Member - Badge

United States v. Grant, III: 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Reverses Conviction.

Law Office of James Novak

*No Probable Cause to Search Prohibited Possessor’s Home for Weapon*

On June 11, 2012, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and remanded a conviction involving a firearm found at the home of a prohibited processor (felon). In order for the search to be constitutional under the Fourth Amendment “probable cause” for the search warrant is required. One exception to this would be under an “exclusionary rule” extension known as the “attenuated exception.” This exception could have only applied if the connection between the unlawful search and the conviction were weak. But the defendants argued on appeal that the connection between the discovery of the weapon through unconstitutional search and the conviction was too heavily weighted.

The lower district court held, that although there was lack of probable cause, a “good faith” exception was made to all the police to proceed with the unlawful search under the “good faith reliance doctrine” (United States v. Leon).

However, the 9th Circuit Court’s opinion reversing the decision felt that the good faith exception that resulted in the search warrant in absence of probable cause failed to meet “fair probability” or even a “as colorable argument” for probable cause that a firearm associated with the homicide at issue, would be found at the search warrant location. Therefore, it was determined that the officers’ warrant was unlawful, and the exception to the attenuated doctrine did not apply, and the evidence was obtained illegally. As a result, the firearm and ammunition evidence was suppressed, and all evidence gained following the unlawful search. As a result, the 9th Circuit Court reversed and remanded the conviction for further proceedings.

Exclusionary Rule: Exception Doctrines for Admittance of Criminal Evidence The Exclusionary Rule or Doctrine disallows prosecution to admit evidence gained unlawfully in violation of the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution. However, the Supreme Court has recognized some exceptions to this rule in favor of police, prosecution, by the State or Government against a defendant. This Exclusionary Rule has 4 exceptions, that would allow evidence to be admitted in court, that otherwise would not have been allowed because it was gathered unlawfully by police. The exceptions include the following circumstances:

• “Attenuation exception”: This allows for evidence to be admitted if the connection between the unlawful search and discovery of the evidence v. the conviction is sufficiently weak; • Good-faith Doctrine: This exemption allows evidence, obtained unlawfully to be admitted. It applies when police acted in “good faith” by relying on a search warrant, that a “reasonable person” would have considered lawful; but later found unconstitutional.

• The criminal evidence was found as a result of an independent search, not the offense for which the defendant was convicted; • The evidence would have been found despite the unlawful search Resources:

http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/11-50036/11-50036-2012-06-11.html http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/good_faith_exception_to_exclusionary_rule

If you “Like” this article please let us know with “+1”. Feel Free to subscribe and “Share”!

Law Office of James Novak 4500 S. Lakeshore Drive Tempe AZ 85282 (480) 413-1499 Arizona DUI, DWI, Drunk Driving & Criminal Defense Firm Serving Tempe, Phoenix, Mesa, Chandler, Gilbert, & Scottsdale AZ Free Initial Consultation

Arizona Criminal Defense Attorney Blog

Arizona Court’s Opinion Reinforces Case Law Dictating Trial Court Jurisdiction Over Defendants Over Eighteen Years of Age In a recent opinion published by the Arizona Court of Appeals, Division One, the court vacated a trial court’s dismissal of an assault indictment...

Recent Arizona Court Opinion Highlights Reality that Multiple Offenses Means Harsher Sentences In Arizona, if a defendant with prior convictions is found guilty of a crime, that defendant will face a harsher sentence than if he or she had no...

“Motive” as a Reason to Admit Otherwise Inadmissible Evidence at Trial When can an Arizona court admit evidence regarding a previous, seemingly unrelated offense during criminal proceedings? The answer is tricky, as...

Contact Us

  1. 1 Free Initial Consultation
  2. 2 Available 24/7
  3. 3 Former Prosecutor

Fill out the contact form or call us at (480) 413-1499 to schedule your free consultation.

Leave Us a Message