Motion to Suppress
If you are charged with a crime the best defense may be a motion to suppress. A motion to suppress is filed by your attorney when it is believed that your consitutuional rights have been violated. The most common times that this happens is when you are stopped and “seized” by the police or when you or your possessions such as your house or car are searched.
If you are arrested following a seizure or a search, you need to contact a Boston criminal defense attorney who has experience winning this type of motion. If the motion to suppress is granted, the case will often times be dismissed due to the fact that the prosecution can’t use the evidence that it had obtained against you due ot the fact that the judge has ruled that your Consitututional Rights were violated by the Government.
As American citizens, we trust our law enforcement officials to keep us safe and follow the laws, but sometimes police officers step over the line in asserting their legal authority. The U.S. Constitution protects all individuals against the illegal search and seizure process of their person or property without probable cause, exigent circumstances or a valid search warrant. If the police don’t have one of these three things they are not allowed to search, seize or arrest you. Law enforcement officers are not responsible for advising people about their right(s) with regard to whether or not a search is lawful so if you are asked by the police as to whether you will consent to a search is often advisable to say no and ask them to contact your defense lawyer.
At Keegan Law, we have been successful in having motions to suppress granted on all kinds of cases. In April of 2012 Attorney Keegan was successful in having a motion granted in Suffolk Superior Court where his client was charged with drug crimes as well as child endangerment. The case involved three codefenants and was being prosecuted by the Martha Coakley’s Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office. After four State Police Detectives and one State Trooper testified over a two day period the Judge agreed with Attorney Keegan and ruled that his client’s constituional rights had been violated and thus suppressed the drug evidence as well as the recorded statement that the State Police made in which the client had made a confession. The Attorney General’s Office was looking for Attorney Keegan’s client to serve jail time if convicted but instead his client was able to walk out the door a free man after the case was dismissed. Out of the three codefendants Attorney Keegan’s client was the only one that Judge had ruled in favor of. The other two clients ended up taking pleas and doing jail time.
Make sure that when you hire an attorney, you choose one with motion and trial experience. Contact us today so that we can help.