IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE [✎ INSERT NAME] DISTRICT OF [✎ INSERT STATE]

United States of America,
    Plaintiff,

v.

[DEFENDANT FULL LEGAL NAME],
    Defendant.

Case No. [✎ INSERT]

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SUPPRESS ILLEGALLY OBTAINED EVIDENCE AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW

[// GUIDANCE: Insert caption exactly as it appears on the docket sheet, matching spacing, capitalization, and punctuation required by the local rules of the district.]

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction...................................................... 2
2. Definitions....................................................... 2
3. Procedural Posture............................................... 3
4. Statement of Relevant Facts...................................... 3
5. Legal Standard................................................... 4
6. Argument........................................................ 4
   6.1. The Warrant Was Constitutionally Defective.................. 4
   6.2. The Search Violated Fed. R. Crim. P. 41..................... 5
   6.3. Exclusion and Fruit-of-the-Poisonous-Tree Doctrine Applies.. 6
7. Request for Evidentiary Hearing.................................. 7
8. Conclusion & Prayer for Relief................................... 7
9. Certificate of Service........................................... 8
10. Signature Block................................................. 8

1. INTRODUCTION

COMES NOW Defendant [DEFENDANT SURNAME] (“Defendant”), by and through undersigned counsel, and, pursuant to the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, Rule 12(b)(3)(C) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and any other applicable authority, respectfully moves this Court for an order suppressing all physical evidence, statements, and derivative evidence obtained as a result of the unconstitutional and unlawful search conducted on [DATE] at [LOCATION].

2. DEFINITIONS

For purposes of this Motion, the following capitalized terms shall have the meanings set forth below:

“Agents” – any federal, state, or local law-enforcement officers who participated in the investigation and/or search at issue.

“Defendant” – [DEFENDANT FULL LEGAL NAME], the accused in the above-captioned matter.

“Evidence” – all tangible items, documents, electronic data, and statements seized or obtained, directly or indirectly, as a result of the challenged search.

“Government” – the United States of America and its counsel of record in this action.

“Premises” – the location searched on [DATE], specifically described as [PREMISES ADDRESS OR DESCRIPTION].

[// GUIDANCE: Add or delete defined terms to track the underlying facts and the search warrant language.]

3. PROCEDURAL POSTURE

1. On [INDICTMENT DATE], a grand jury returned an indictment charging Defendant with [COUNT(S) & STATUTE(S)].
2. The Government produced discovery under Fed. R. Crim. P. 16 on [DATE], including the search-warrant affidavit, warrant, and inventory.
3. The undersigned files this Motion within the time permitted by Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b)(3) and Local Criminal Rule [✎ INSERT].

4. STATEMENT OF RELEVANT FACTS

[// GUIDANCE: Provide a concise, record-supported chronology. Include all warrant application facts, execution details (time, manner of entry, scope), any statements elicited, and chain of custody references. Use numbered paragraphs for clarity.]

1. On [DATE], Agents applied for a search warrant before Magistrate Judge [NAME] for the Premises.
2. The warrant affidavit relied primarily on information from a confidential informant (“CI-1”) whose credibility was not independently corroborated.
3. The warrant, issued at [TIME], authorized a search for “[ITEMS].”
4. Agents executed the warrant at [TIME OF ENTRY] without announcing their presence, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 3109.
5. During the search, Agents seized [LIST ITEMS] and questioned Defendant without Miranda warnings.

5. LEGAL STANDARD

1. The Fourth Amendment guarantees “[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures….” U.S. Const. amend. IV.
2. Rule 12(b)(3)(C) permits a defendant to move to suppress evidence obtained in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States. Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b)(3)(C).
3. A warrant must be supported by probable cause and describe with particularity the place to be searched and the items to be seized.
4. Under the “fruit-of-the-poisonous-tree” doctrine, evidence obtained directly or derivatively from an unlawful search must be excluded.

6. ARGUMENT

6.1. The Warrant Was Constitutionally Defective

a. Lack of Probable Cause. The supporting affidavit relied almost exclusively on uncorroborated hearsay from CI-1. Without independent verification or indicia of reliability, the affidavit fails to establish probable cause.

b. Overbreadth & Particularity. The warrant authorized seizure of broad categories of “documents and records” without temporal limitation, violating the particularity requirement of the Fourth Amendment.

6.2. The Search Violated Fed. R. Crim. P. 41

a. Execution Outside Authorized Hours. Rule 41(e)(2)(A)(ii) requires daytime execution absent specific judicial authorization; Agents executed the warrant at [TIME], exceeding that authority.

b. Failure to Announce. Agents forcibly entered the Premises without first knocking and announcing, contravening 18 U.S.C. § 3109 and rendering the search unreasonable.

c. Seizure Beyond Warrant Scope. Agents seized items not enumerated in the warrant, constituting a general search.

6.3. Exclusion and Fruit-of-the-Poisonous-Tree Doctrine Applies

a. Direct Evidence. All items seized during the unlawful search must be suppressed.

b. Derivative Evidence. Any statements or subsequent investigative leads stemming from the illegal search are tainted and must likewise be excluded.

c. Good-Faith Exception Inapplicable. Where a warrant is facially deficient and execution flagrantly violates statutory safeguards, the Government cannot invoke the good-faith exception.

7. REQUEST FOR EVIDENTIARY HEARING

Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(d), Defendant respectfully requests an evidentiary hearing to resolve factual disputes regarding the warrant’s procurement and execution.

[// GUIDANCE: Some districts require a separate written request or proposed order—confirm local practice.]

8. CONCLUSION & PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Defendant prays that this Court:

1. Conduct an evidentiary hearing;
2. Suppress all Evidence obtained as a direct or indirect result of the unlawful search conducted on [DATE];
3. Suppress any and all statements made by Defendant following the search; and
4. Grant such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

9. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on [DATE], I electronically filed the foregoing Motion with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send notification of such filing to all counsel of record.

[ATTORNEY NAME]
Attorney for Defendant

10. SIGNATURE BLOCK

Respectfully submitted,

[ATTORNEY NAME]
[LAW FIRM OR FEDERAL DEFENDER]
[BAR NUMBER]
[ADDRESS]
[PHONE] | [EMAIL]

Attorney for [DEFENDANT NAME]

[// GUIDANCE: Verify whether notarization or sworn declaration under 28 U.S.C. § 1746 is required in your district; add accordingly.]
[// GUIDANCE:

1. Timing. File before the Rule 12(c) deadline or obtain leave of court.
2. Attachments. Include as exhibits: (a) search-warrant affidavit, (b) inventory, (c) relevant discovery excerpts.
3. Local Rules. Insert pinpoint citations to district-specific Local Criminal Rules (e.g., D.D.C. LCrR 47) and standing orders.
4. Hearing Logistics. Propose dates, expected witnesses, and estimated duration in a separate notice if required.
5. Preservation. Even if suppression is denied, ensure the record is preserved for interlocutory appeal under 18 U.S.C. § 3731.
6. Protective Orders. If discovery materials are subject to a protective order, file redacted or under seal per local practice.
   ]