The Law Office of Ryan N. Yadav, LLC

Criminal Defense in Your Neck of the Woods

Motion to Suppress Reasonable Suspicion1

COMES NOW, the Defendant, by and through his undersigned attorney and files this Motion to Suppress Physical Evidence pursuant to Rule 3.190(h) of the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure and moves this Honorable Court to suppress all evidence leading to the Defendant’s arrest on July 28, 2015, particularly cannabis, paraphernalia, and probable cause as well as observation of the Defendant for Driving While License Suspended.  We seek to suppress evidence because there was no legal reason for law enforcement to make a stop of the vehicle allegedly driven by the Defendant.

 

            As grounds for this motion, the Defendant would show that the evidence mentioned above was obtained by law enforcement officers as a result of an unreasonable search and seizure in violation of the Defendant’s rights as guaranteed by the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and Articles I, §1, of the Florida Constitution, in that:

 The grounds upon which this motion is based is that the officers lacked suspicion to make contact with the vehicle then being operated by XX and that    said officers did not observe sufficient circumstances to formulate reasonable      belief that a crime or civil traffic infraction had been committed by the Defendant. The evidence sought to be suppressed is all evidence obtained from Defendant,  on July 28, 2015 by individuals acting under authority of the Oviedo Police Department.The facts upon which this motion is based are:

 

  1. On or about 10:30 a.m. July 28, 2015, XX was subjected to the stop of his motor vehicle by the Police Officer, Detective YY.

 Prior to the stop, the Police Officer ZZ, alleged that XX was personally known to him and thereafter ZZ observed XX driving a motor vehicle. Further, Officer ZZ alleged that he had personal knowledge that XX had a suspended driver’s license.Officer ZZ alerted Detective YY who eventually stopped the vehicle driven by XX for Driving While License Suspended without knowledge.XX was arrested for the offenses of possession of cannabis less than 20 grams, possession of paraphernalia, and driving while license cancelled, suspended or revoked.

 

  1. The evidence sought herein to be suppressed was obtained as a result of an illegal stop and detainment because the police authorities did not possess the requisite “reasonable suspicion” to conduct a traffic stop on XXs vehicle. See Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471,488, 83 S.Ct 407  (1963).        

 

  1. No evidence suggests that law enforcement observed any civil infraction or criminal activity of any kind other than one (1) officer’s “personal knowledge” of XX.
  1. No evidence suggests that law enforcement had knowledge of the state of  XX's license on or about 10:30 A.M. on July 28, 2015 or how law enforcement was able to identify XX.

 

  1. The Stop of XX was random, capricious, and based on an “inarticulate  hunch”. Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct 1868 (1968).

 

  1. Since the officer(s) had no legal grounds for stopping and detaining the  Defendant, all evidence from the time when the officer observed and then stopped the Defendant must be suppressed or excluded as “fruit from the poisonous tree”.

 

  1. If the State is not ready with live witnesses to disprove the allegations in this motion then we ask that it be granted absent very good cause. See State v. Fortesa-Ruiz, 559 So. 2d 1180 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1990).

 

            WHEREFORE, the Defendant respectfully requests this Honorable Court to grant this Motion to Suppress and suppress and/or exclude evidence from the trial of this matter as discussed herein or in the alternative Dismiss this instant case.

View Our Practice Areas