What is the test for exclusion of evidence obtained as a result of an unreasonable search and seizure?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Fernandez, C066670, Super. Ct. No. CR10-0081 (Cal. App. 2011):
"The Fourth Amendment provides '[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated . . . .' [Citation.] This guarantee has been incorporated into the Fourteenth Amendment to the federal Constitution and is applicable to the states. [Citation.]" (People v. Camacho (2000) 23 Cal.4th 824, 829-830.) Evidence obtained as a result of an unreasonable search and seizure is excluded at trial only if exclusion is required by the federal Constitution. (Id. at p. 830.)
"In reviewing the trial court's ruling on the suppression motion, [appellate courts] uphold any factual finding, express or implied, that is supported by substantial evidence, but [the courts] independently assess, as a matter of law, whether the challenged search or seizure conforms to constitutional standards of reasonableness. [Citation.]" (People v. Hughes (2002) 27 Cal.4th 287, 327.)
In this case, the officers did not have a search warrant. The prosecution had the burden to prove that no search occurred
Page 5
or that an exception to the warrant requirement applied.
(People v. Camacho, supra, 23 Cal.4th at p. 830.)
"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.
