On review of the denial of a motion to suppress, how is the court determined that search and seizure was reasonable?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Laughlin, F062336 (Cal. App. 2012):
On review of the denial of a motion to suppress, we defer to the trial court's factual findings, where supported by substantial evidence, but exercise our independent judgment to determine whether, on the facts found, the search and seizure were reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. (People v. Camacho (2000) 23 Cal.4th 824, 830.)
Page 4
A police officer may lawfully detain a motorist on reasonable suspicion that the driver has violated the law. (People v. Wells (2006) 38 Cal.4th 1078, 1082.) The guiding principle is the reasonableness of the particular governmental intrusion. In making our determination, we examine the totality of the circumstances. (Id. at p. 1083.) Where a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity exists, the public rightfully expects a police officer to inquire into such circumstances. (Ibid.)
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
