STATE OF RHODE ISLAND

[COURT NAME]

[COUNTY]

STATE OF RHODE ISLAND

v.

[DEFENDANT NAME]

Cr. No. [____]

MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW

[Rhode Island Const. art. I, § 6; U.S. Const. amend. IV; R.I. Super. R. Crim. P. 12(b)(3), 41; R.I. R. Evid. 401–403]

[// GUIDANCE: Insert court-approved caption block exactly as required by the local clerk’s office. Adjust rule citations if filing in District Court rather than Superior Court.]

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction & Relief Requested .................................... 2
2. Statement of Relevant Facts ........................................ 2
3. Issues Presented ................................................... 3
4. Applicable Legal Standards ......................................... 3
   4.1 Constitutional & Statutory Framework .......................... 3
   4.2 Rhode Island Evidentiary Standards ............................ 4
5. Argument ........................................................... 4
   5.1 Absence of Probable Cause ..................................... 4
   5.2 Defective or Overbroad Warrant ................................ 5
   5.3 Non-Compliance with Rule 41 Procedural Requirements ........... 6
   5.4 Fruits of an Unlawful Search and Seizure ...................... 7
   5.5 Inapplicability of the Good-Faith Exception ................... 7
6. Request for Evidentiary Hearing .................................... 8
7. Conclusion & Prayer for Relief ..................................... 8
8. Certification of Service .......................................... 9
9. Proposed Order .................................................... 10

[// GUIDANCE: Update pagination after final edits. TOC enhances readability for the court and is permitted under local rules.]

1. INTRODUCTION & RELIEF REQUESTED

Defendant [DEFENDANT NAME] (“Defendant”), by and through undersigned counsel, respectfully moves this Honorable Court, pursuant to Rule 12(b)(3) and Rule 41 of the Rhode Island Superior Court Rules of Criminal Procedure, to suppress all physical evidence, statements, and any derivative fruits obtained as a result of the search conducted on [DATE] at [LOCATION] (the “Challenged Search”).

Defendant further requests an evidentiary hearing on the issues raised herein and such other relief as the Court deems just and proper.

2. STATEMENT OF RELEVANT FACTS

[// GUIDANCE: Provide concise, record-supported facts. Omit argument. Reference exhibit numbers where available.]

1. On [DATE], law-enforcement officers of [AGENCY] executed Search Warrant No. [____] at [LOCATION].
2. The affidavit supporting the warrant was sworn by [AFFIANT NAME] and relied primarily on [e.g., anonymous tip / confidential informant].
3. During execution, officers seized:
   a. [ITEM 1]
   b. [ITEM 2]
4. Defendant was present and placed under arrest at [TIME].
5. Defendant filed the instant motion within the time limits established by Rule 12(b)(3).

3. ISSUES PRESENTED

A. Whether the Challenged Search violated article I, § 6 of the Rhode Island Constitution and the Fourth Amendment for lack of probable cause.
B. Whether the warrant was facially overbroad and/or stale.
C. Whether officers violated mandatory execution procedures under Rule 41.
D. Whether the State can invoke the good-faith exception when the warrant is constitutionally infirm or executed unlawfully.

4. APPLICABLE LEGAL STANDARDS

4.1 Constitutional & Statutory Framework

1. Article I, § 6 of the Rhode Island Constitution and the Fourth Amendment prohibit unreasonable searches and seizures.
2. Rule 41 governs issuance and execution of search warrants in Rhode Island criminal proceedings, requiring, inter alia:
   • Probable cause supported by oath or affirmation;
   • Particular description of the place to be searched and items to be seized;
   • Execution within ten (10) days of issuance unless otherwise directed;
   • Return of the warrant with inventory.

4.2 Rhode Island Evidentiary Standards

Relevant evidence is admissible only if it satisfies the relevance threshold under R.I. R. Evid. 401 and is not excluded under Rule 403 as unfairly prejudicial. Evidence obtained in violation of constitutional or rule-based requirements is inadmissible per the “exclusionary rule” and its derivative “fruit-of-the-poisonous-tree” doctrine.

5. ARGUMENT

5.1 Absence of Probable Cause

1. The affidavit relies on uncorroborated hearsay from an untested confidential informant.
2. No independent police investigation corroborated the informant’s claims.
3. The affidavit omits material facts casting doubt on reliability, violating the magistrate’s neutral-and-detached requirement.
4. Accordingly, probable cause was lacking, rendering the warrant invalid.

5.2 Defective or Overbroad Warrant

1. The warrant fails to describe with particularity the alleged contraband, permitting a general search.
2. Several categories (e.g., “any and all electronic devices”) are not tied to the alleged offense, risking exploratory rummaging.
3. Such overbreadth violates article I, § 6 and the Fourth Amendment; evidence seized under an overbroad warrant must be suppressed.

5.3 Non-Compliance with Rule 41 Procedural Requirements

1. Execution occurred on [DATE], [NUMBER] days after issuance—beyond the ten-day limit prescribed by Rule 41(c).
2. Officers failed to provide Defendant with a copy of the warrant and inventory at the scene as required by Rule 41(d).
3. Failure to adhere to mandatory procedural safeguards mandates suppression.

5.4 Fruits of an Unlawful Search and Seizure

1. All items seized during the Challenged Search, as well as derivative evidence (including Defendant’s postarrest statements), constitute fruits of the poisonous tree.
2. Suppression must extend to direct and indirect products of the illegality to effectuate the deterrent purpose of the exclusionary rule.

5.5 Inapplicability of the Good-Faith Exception

1. Rhode Island courts narrowly construe any good-faith exception, particularly under the Rhode Island Constitution.
2. The executing officers could not have reasonably relied on a warrant that was facially defective and executed in contravention of Rule 41.
3. Suppression therefore remains the appropriate remedy.

6. REQUEST FOR EVIDENTIARY HEARING

Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(3) and controlling precedent, Defendant requests an evidentiary (Franks-type) hearing to:
1. Challenge the veracity of the affidavit;
2. Examine deviations from Rule 41 execution requirements; and
3. Develop a full record for appellate review.

[// GUIDANCE: Include anticipated witness list and time estimates if required by local administrative order.]

7. CONCLUSION & PRAYER FOR RELIEF

For the foregoing reasons, Defendant respectfully requests that this Court:

A. Grant the Motion to Suppress and exclude all evidence obtained during and subsequent to the Challenged Search;
B. Order the State to return seized property not otherwise contraband;
C. Preclude the State from introducing any derivative statements or evidence; and
D. Grant such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

8. CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on the ___ day of ____, 20__, a true and accurate copy of the foregoing Motion to Suppress Evidence was served by [E-FILE / HAND / FIRST-CLASS MAIL] upon [NAME], Esq., [TITLE] of the Office of the Attorney General, [ADDRESS].

[SIGNATURE]
[ATTORNEY NAME], Esq. (#_____)
[LAW FIRM]
[ADDRESS]
[PHONE] | [EMAIL]

9. PROPOSED ORDER

STATE OF RHODE ISLAND
[COURT NAME]

State v. [DEFENDANT NAME]
Cr. No. [____]

ORDER

Upon consideration of Defendant’s Motion to Suppress Evidence, any memoranda and affidavits filed, and arguments of counsel, it is hereby

ORDERED, that Defendant’s Motion is GRANTED. All evidence seized on [DATE] at [LOCATION], together with any custodial statements or derivative evidence, is SUPPRESSED.

ENTER: _____
Date: _____
Justice, [COURT NAME]

[// GUIDANCE: Submit proposed order via separate e-filing event if required by court clerk. Ensure judge’s name is not pre-typed unless local practice directs otherwise.]