Evidence Suppression in Judgments Transcription

Judgments transcription often deals with the presentation of evidence and its interpretation. In

a court of law, evidence is everything and is one of the elements that decide the outcome of a

lawsuit. However, US law does insist on evidence gathered the right way, and in lawsuits

where this is not the case, such evidence is suppressed.

The Context of Suppressing Evidence

Suppressing evidence is often found in transcription of judgments and is a powerful enough

tool to alter the path of a criminal charge, and even lead to its dismissal. Suppressing takes

place if the search for evidence was carried out in violation of the constitutional rights of the

defendant. This move relies on the United States Constitutions Fourth Amendment and points

out to its violation.

Such violations occur on the part of the police in situations such as arriving at the place where

the disturbance is, such as car accidents or traffic stops, or while executing a search warrant.

Violation of rights refers to the following actions illegal search and seizure, and unauthorized

chemical analyses or breathalyzer tests. These could cause the search warrant suppression

motion and the knock and talk suppression motion to be activated.

Where Evidence Suppression Does Not Work

However, if the prosecution brings up many evidence pieces and any of them is strong enough

to keep the conviction sustained, suppression of any one of the evidence pieces would not

bring about dismissal of all the charges. If the prosecutions case is solely built upon unlawful

discovery of evidence - such as during an unauthorized car search, or improper or forceful

confession, the defendants attorney could suppress the evidence and even end the case before

the selection of jury.

The Fourth Amendment or Exclusionary Rule

The Fourth Amendment, also called the exclusionary rule, is a constitutional right protecting

people against unreasonable or unauthorized searches. As a result, the rule makes the evidence

gathered during such searches inadmissible at court for criminal prosecution, in some cases.

The law also emphasizes that there are limits in the kind of circumstances which would

validate the issuing of a warrant.

There are norms regarding evidence suppression. If there are many evidence pieces held by the

prosecution, and if any evidence is enough for sustaining a conviction, the suppressing of one

evidence piece would not cause all the charges to be dismissed. But if the case has been built

upon unlawful discoveries during unauthorized searches, then the evidence suppression can

help end the case before it heads to the jury selection.

Further Strengthening of the Exclusionary Rule

This exclusionary rule is further strengthened by another doctrine which states that the court

could exclude from the trial evidence seized through illegal searches, but also evidence or

confession derived from the indirect search. If, following an arrest, the defendant confesses to

having committed the crime, the court could deem the confession to be inadmissible if it

declares the arrest itself was unconstitutional in the first place.

Citizens should also know that they have the right to politely refuse requests by law

enforcement to search their vehicle if there is absence of a valid reason. For more

comprehensive and accurate details regarding evidence suppression and its legal aspects, you

need to discuss the same with a practicing lawyer.