If any evidence against you was obtained in violation of your constitutional rights, it may not be admissible in court. A judge may suppress it, meaning the prosecution cannot use the affected evidence against you if your case goes to trial.
The police must follow the law when conducting investigations and gathering evidence in a criminal case. This is important because the court may exclude evidence obtained through unlawful means, which can weaken the prosecution’s case.
Instances when this can happen
Evidence may be deemed inadmissible in court if it was obtained via any of the following means:
- In an illegal search and seizure where the police search you or your property without a valid warrant or probate cause.
- A confession obtained through coercive or unlawful interrogation tactics.
- Violation of your Miranda Rights before questioning under lawful custody.
- Denial or right to counsel.
- Entrapment, where law enforcement induces you to commit a crime you would not have otherwise committed.
For instance, suppose the police unlawfully pulled you over in a case of drunk driving. It is a violation of your constitutional rights as the law protects you from unreasonable searches by law enforcement. In such a case, the court may suppress evidence acquired from the illegal stop.
How the process works
Suppressing evidence involves filing a motion to suppress during pretrial hearings. This is a petition to the court to suppress specific evidence for various reasons. Whether the motion will sail through depends on the legal arguments presented, emphasizing the need for qualified guidance and assistance.
Excluding evidence from your case can help tilt the scales in your favor during trial. It can also give you bargaining power during plea negotiations. Leveraging this in your defense strategy can increase the odds of a favorable outcome for your case.