IN THE [___] COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO

[___] JUDICIAL DISTRICT

State of New Mexico,

Plaintiff,

v. No. [D-_-__]

[DEFENDANT FULL LEGAL NAME],

Defendant.

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE

(pursuant to Rule 5-212 NMRA; U.S. Const. amend. IV; and N.M. Const. art. II, § 10)

[// GUIDANCE: Replace all bracketed placeholders before filing. Tailor factual assertions and add exhibits (e.g., warrant, police reports, body-camera footage) as necessary. Attach proposed findings of fact for the Court’s convenience.]

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction.......................................................... 2
2. Procedural Posture.................................................... 2
3. Statement of Relevant Facts.......................................... 3
4. Issues Presented..................................................... 4
5. Legal Standards...................................................... 4
   5.1 Constitutional Protections........................................ 4
   5.2 New Mexico Suppression Doctrine................................... 5
   5.3 Good-Faith Exception – Non-Applicability........................... 5
6. Argument............................................................. 6
   6.1 Warrantless Search / Invalid Warrant............................... 6
   6.2 Absence of Valid Exception........................................ 7
   6.3 Fruits of the Poisonous Tree...................................... 7
   6.4 Rejection of Federal Good-Faith Reliance.......................... 8
7. Relief Requested..................................................... 8
8. Request for Evidentiary Hearing...................................... 8
9. Compliance with Rule 5-212 NMRA....................................... 9
10. Reservation of Additional Objections................................ 9
11. Conclusion.......................................................... 9
12. Certificate of Service.............................................. 10
13. Proposed Order...................................................... 11

1. Introduction

Defendant [DEFENDANT NAME] (“Defendant”) respectfully moves this Court for an Order suppressing all tangible and derivative evidence obtained on or about [DATE] as a result of an unconstitutional search and/or seizure, together with any statements or observations subsequently obtained (collectively, the “Challenged Evidence”).

2. Procedural Posture

1. An Information was filed on [DATE], charging Defendant with [CHARGES].
2. The State has produced discovery indicating that the Challenged Evidence forms a substantial part of its case-in-chief.
3. Pursuant to Rule 5-601 NMRA, trial is currently set for [DATE]. This Motion is timely under Rule 5-212 NMRA.

3. Statement of Relevant Facts

[// GUIDANCE: Provide concise, record-supported facts. Cite discovery bates numbers or exhibit labels.]
1. On [DATE/TIME], officers from the [AGENCY] approached Defendant’s [residence/vehicle/person] at [LOCATION].
2. Officers [obtained / did not obtain] a warrant numbered [WARRANT NO.], issued on [DATE/TIME] by Judge [NAME].
3. The warrant affidavit relied on information from [SOURCE], which, upon review, contained material misstatements and omissions.
4. Officers executed the warrant and seized [ITEMS]. No exigent circumstances were present.
5. Defendant was arrested and transported to [FACILITY], where officers conducted a custodial interrogation without administering Miranda warnings.
6. The State intends to introduce the seized items and Defendant’s post-arrest statements at trial.

4. Issues Presented

A. Whether the search and seizure of Defendant violated the Fourth Amendment and Article II, § 10 of the New Mexico Constitution.
B. Whether any recognized exception to the warrant requirement applies.
C. Whether New Mexico’s categorical exclusionary rule mandates suppression notwithstanding any asserted good-faith reliance by law enforcement.

5. Legal Standards

5.1 Constitutional Protections

• U.S. Const. amend. IV prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures.
• N.M. Const. art. II, § 10 provides co-equal but independent protection, requiring suppression of unlawfully obtained evidence.

5.2 New Mexico Suppression Doctrine

• Rule 11-402 NMRA bars admission of evidence “not admissible under any other rule or law.”
• Rule 11-403 NMRA authorizes exclusion where probative value is substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice—including constitutional violations.
• Rule 5-212 NMRA governs pre-trial motions to suppress in district court, requiring that all such motions be in writing, state with particularity the grounds relied upon, and be filed no later than 20 days after arraignment unless good cause is shown.

5.3 Good-Faith Exception – Non-Applicability in New Mexico

While federal jurisprudence recognizes a good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule, New Mexico has not adopted that exception under Article II, § 10. Accordingly, evidence obtained in violation of the state constitution is subject to mandatory suppression regardless of officer intent or reliance.

6. Argument

6.1 The Search Was Conducted Without a Valid Warrant or With an Invalid Warrant

1. The warrant affidavit failed to establish probable cause because [SPECIFY DEFICIENCIES].
2. Even if the warrant appeared facially valid, material omissions and misrepresentations invalidate the magistrate’s probable-cause determination, rendering the search warrantless for constitutional purposes.

6.2 No Exception to the Warrant Requirement Applies

1. Consent was neither voluntary nor informed under the totality of circumstances.
2. No exigent circumstances existed: officers had ample time to secure the scene and seek a warrant supported by lawful probable cause.
3. Plain-view doctrine is inapplicable because the incriminating nature of the items was not immediately apparent and officers were not lawfully present.

6.3 Fruits of the Poisonous Tree

Derivative evidence—including Defendant’s custodial statements—must also be suppressed because it was obtained as a direct and proximate result of the unlawful search. The causal chain was not sufficiently attenuated.

6.4 The State Cannot Invoke the Federal Good-Faith Exception

Under New Mexico’s broader constitutional protections, law-enforcement officers’ subjective good-faith reliance on an invalid warrant or statute does not overcome the exclusionary mandate.

7. Relief Requested

Defendant asks this Court to:
A. Suppress all physical evidence seized on [DATE].
B. Suppress all derivative evidence, including Defendant’s statements.
C. Preclude the State from introducing any reference to the Challenged Evidence at trial.
D. Order such further relief as justice requires.

8. Request for Evidentiary Hearing

Pursuant to Rule 5-212(C) NMRA, Defendant requests an evidentiary hearing to resolve factual disputes regarding the legality of the search, including the validity of the warrant affidavit and the voluntariness of any alleged consent.

9. Compliance with Rule 5-212 NMRA

This Motion is:
1. In writing and timely filed.
2. Supported by specific facts and legal authority.
3. Served on the State contemporaneously herewith.
[// GUIDANCE: Attach any supporting affidavits or exhibits as separate, labeled documents.]

10. Reservation of Additional Objections

Defendant reserves the right to raise additional suppression grounds that may become apparent through continued discovery, pre-trial rulings, or newly disclosed evidence.

11. Conclusion

For the foregoing reasons and those that may be adduced at hearing, Defendant respectfully requests that the Court grant this Motion in its entirety.

Respectfully submitted this ___ day of ____, 20__.

text

[ATTORNEY NAME]
[State Bar No.]
[LAW FIRM]
[Address]
[Phone] | [Email]
Attorney for Defendant

12. Certificate of Service

I hereby certify that on the ___ day of ____, 20__, a true and correct copy of the foregoing Motion to Suppress Evidence was [mailed / hand-delivered / emailed] to:

text
[PROSECUTOR NAME]
[Office of the District Attorney]
[Address / Email]

text

[ATTORNEY NAME]

13. Proposed Order

text
STATE OF NEW MEXICO
[___] JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
State of New Mexico v. [DEFENDANT]

No. [D-_-__]

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE

THIS MATTER having come before the Court on Defendant’s Motion to Suppress Evidence, the Court having considered the motion, the State’s response, the evidence and argument presented, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises,

FINDS that the search and seizure at issue violated the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article II, Section 10 of the New Mexico Constitution;

FINDS that no recognized exception to the warrant requirement applies and that New Mexico does not recognize a good-faith exception;

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that:
1. The Motion is GRANTED.
2. All evidence seized on [DATE] and all derivative evidence, including Defendant’s statements, are SUPPRESSED and shall not be admitted at trial or any other proceeding.
3. The State shall immediately notify all law-enforcement personnel and witnesses of this ruling.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this ___ day of ____, 20__.

DISTRICT JUDGE

[// GUIDANCE: Confirm that local rules do not require an accompanying brief, notice of motion setting, or separate verification. Adjust caption for metropolitan or magistrate court (Rules 6-206 NMRA or 7-204 NMRA) if applicable.]