muller-motion-to-suppress

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Table of Contents
Table of Authorities..................................................................................................3
I. Introduction....................................................................................................4
II.
III.
Description of Evidence to be Suppressed....................................................4
Statement of Facts......................................................................................5-7
IV. Points and Authorities................................................................................. 7
A. Defendant Has a Legitimate Expectation of Privacy to Challenge the
Legality of the Search and Seizure...........................................................7
B. The Phone Was Never Abandoned, It Was Simply Lost..........................9
C. The Burden is Upon the Prosecution to Prove That the Search was
Reasonable Since the Police Did Not Possess a Search Warrant….......10
D. The Warrantless Search of Defendant’s Cellular Phone Was
Impermissible Because No Exception to the Warrant Requirement
Existed....................................................................................................10
1. No Exigent Circumstance Existed that Would Justify the Search
of the Cellular Phone.....................................................................10
2. Analogous Case Law on Cellular Phone Searches Indicates the
Search was Unlawful....................................................................12
E. The Fruits of the Unlawful Search Must Be Suppressed and Forever
Eliminated as Evidence in the Case and All Others that Follow……...13
V. Conclusion...................................................................................................14
25
26
27
28
People v. Muller
Defendant’s Motion to Suppress Evidence 2