Motion To Suppress Rebuttal

REBUTTAL TO MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE
San Andreas State Troopers, Plaintiff, v. Fin Houston, Defendant.
Judge: Chief Justice Tegan Tate
Case:#*
TO THE HONORABLE COURT:
The Plaintiff, San Andreas State Troopers, by and through counsel, respectfully submits this rebuttal to the Defendant’s Motion to Suppress Evidence.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
*. Lawful Arrest and Impoundment: On March *, *, law enforcement officers arrested the Defendant, Fin Houston, based on probable cause for multiple offenses, including Fleeing & Eluding, Illegal Possession of a Class * Firearm, and Possession of Illegal Firearm Attachments.
*. K9 Alert and Safety Concerns: The K9 alert and the presence of alleged gang members justified the officers’ decision not to search the RV immediately at the scene, prioritizing officer safety.
*. Secured Storage: The RV was impounded and securely stored to prevent tampering or destruction of potential evidence.
*. Subsequent Search: The search of the RV conducted at the secure facility uncovered controlled substances and materials associated with drug manufacturing, leading to additional charges.
II. ARGUMENT
A. The Search Was Justified Under the Automobile Exception
*. Readily Mobile Vehicle: The RV, as a motor vehicle, falls under the automobile exception to the warrant requirement. Despite being impounded, its inherent mobility justified the search.
*. Exigent Circumstances: The potential presence of controlled substances and the Defendant’s known criminal activity created an exigent circumstance.
*. Practical Impracticality of Obtaining a Warrant: The officers acted reasonably given the circumstances, and obtaining a warrant was not practical due to the immediate need to secure potential evidence.
B. Evidence Should Not Be Suppressed
*. Good Faith Exception: The officers acted in good faith, believing their actions were lawful under the automobile exception.
*. Inevitable Discovery Doctrine: Even if the search was deemed unconstitutional, the evidence would have been inevitably discovered through lawful means.
III. CONCLUSION
For these reasons, the Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court:
*. Deny the Defendant’s Motion to Suppress Evidence.
*. Allow all evidence obtained from the RV search to be admissible in court.
Respectfully submitted,
Issued this March *, *,
BY THE ORDER OF THE COURT
Joseph Profaci
Chief Justice Tegan Tate
Attorney for Plaintiff, San Andreas State Troopers
Chief Justice of the Superior Court
Date Signed:
SIGNATURE:
SIGNATURE:
Joseph Profaci
…………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………..