State Criminal Motion to Suppress

MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE

MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW

(Pursuant to Tex. Code Crim. Proc. arts. 28.01, 38.22, and 38.23)

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:

[DEFENDANT'S FULL NAME] ("Defendant"), by and through undersigned counsel, respectfully moves this Court, pursuant to Article 28.01, Section 1(6) of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, for an order suppressing the evidence described herein, and in support thereof shows the Court as follows:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Definitions
2. Relief Requested
3. Statement of Jurisdiction and Venue
4. Statement of Relevant Facts
5. Legal Bases for Suppression
6. Argument and Authorities
7. Prayer
8. Proposed Order
9. Verification
10. Certificate of Service

1. DEFINITIONS

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

1.1 "Defendant" means [DEFENDANT'S FULL NAME].
1.2 "State" means the State of Texas, acting through the [COUNTY] County Criminal District Attorney's Office.
1.3 "Search" means the investigative conduct undertaken on or about [SEARCH DATE] at [LOCATION].
1.4 "Evidence" means all tangible items, statements, and derivative information obtained during or as a result of the Search, including but not limited to [ITEM LIST].
1.5 "Officer(s)" means [NAME(S) AND AGENCY], the law-enforcement personnel who conducted or assisted with the Search.

2. RELIEF REQUESTED

Pursuant to U.S. Const. amend. IV; Tex. Const. art. I, § 9; and Tex. Code Crim. Proc. arts. 38.22 and 38.23, Defendant respectfully moves the Court to:

a. Suppress the Evidence described above and preclude its use by the State for any purpose at trial;
b. Preclude any reference to, mention of, or testimony about the Evidence in the presence of the jury;
c. Order the State to identify and produce all derivative fruits of the challenged Evidence; and
d. Conduct an evidentiary hearing on this Motion pursuant to Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 28.01, § 1(6).

3. STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION AND VENUE

3.1 This Court has jurisdiction over this criminal proceeding pursuant to Tex. Const. art. V, § 8 and Tex. Gov't Code § 24.007, which vest Texas district courts with original jurisdiction over felony criminal cases.
3.2 Venue is proper in [COUNTY] County because the offense charged and the Search at issue occurred within this county.
3.3 This Motion is timely filed as a pretrial motion under Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 28.01, § 1(6), which authorizes the trial court to determine motions to suppress evidence on the motion itself, on opposing affidavits, or upon oral testimony, in the court's discretion.

4. STATEMENT OF RELEVANT FACTS

4.1 On [DATE/TIME], Officer(s) [NAME] initiated contact with Defendant at [LOCATION].
4.2 Officer(s) detained Defendant for [DURATION] without articulable reasonable suspicion.
4.3 Without a warrant, consent, or exigent circumstances, Officer(s) searched [VEHICLE/RESIDENCE/PERSON].
4.4 During the Search, Officer(s) seized [ITEMS].
4.5 Officer(s) subjected Defendant to custodial interrogation and elicited [ORAL/WRITTEN] statements without first providing the warnings required by Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 38.22, § 2, and without obtaining a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary waiver of those rights.

5. LEGAL BASES FOR SUPPRESSION

1. Warrantless Search and Seizure — The Search was conducted without a valid warrant and without a recognized exception to the warrant requirement.
2. Lack of Probable Cause — In the alternative, any warrant that issued was not supported by probable cause on the face of the supporting affidavit.
3. Illegal Detention or Arrest — The initial detention or arrest of Defendant was not supported by reasonable suspicion or probable cause and tainted all Evidence subsequently obtained.
4. Violation of the Texas Statutory Exclusionary Rule — Under Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 38.23(a), evidence obtained in violation of any provision of the Constitution or laws of the State of Texas, or of the Constitution or laws of the United States, is inadmissible in a Texas criminal trial.
5. Statutory Confession Violation — To the extent the Evidence includes an oral or written statement obtained through custodial interrogation, that statement fails to comply with the warning and waiver requirements of Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 38.22, §§ 2 and 3, and is independently inadmissible on that basis.
6. Inapplicability of the Article 38.23(b) Good-Faith Exception — The narrow good-faith exception in Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 38.23(b) does not apply because [the Search was warrantless / the warrant was not issued by a neutral magistrate / the warrant was not based on probable cause] — state which applies.

6. ARGUMENT AND AUTHORITIES

6.1 Burden of Proof

A defendant meets his or her initial burden by demonstrating that a search or seizure occurred without a warrant. Once that showing is made, the burden shifts to the State to prove the reasonableness of the warrantless search or seizure. Amador v. State, 221 S.W.3d 666, 672-73 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007). Where a warrant was obtained, the State must establish that the warrant was validly issued and supported by probable cause.

6.2 Constitutional Violations

The Search violated Defendant's right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, § 9 of the Texas Constitution.

6.3 The Texas Statutory Exclusionary Rule (Article 38.23) Is Broader Than the Federal Rule

Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 38.23(a) provides: "No evidence obtained by an officer or other person in violation of any provisions of the Constitution or laws of the State of Texas, or of the Constitution or laws of the United States of America, shall be admitted in evidence against the accused on the trial of any criminal case." Unlike the federal exclusionary rule, which reaches only violations of the U.S. Constitution (principally the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments), Article 38.23 excludes evidence obtained in violation of any Texas or federal law — constitutional or statutory — and applies to evidence illegally obtained by private persons as well as government officers. Article 38.23 also entitles Defendant to a jury instruction, where a fact issue is raised, directing the jury to disregard evidence it believes (or has reasonable doubt) was illegally obtained.

6.4 The Article 38.23(b) Good-Faith Exception Is Narrow and Does Not Displace Article 38.23(a)

Texas has not adopted the broad "good-faith" exception to the exclusionary rule articulated in United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984), for warrantless searches. The only good-faith exception under Texas law is the narrow statutory exception codified at Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 38.23(b), which applies only where evidence "was obtained by a law enforcement officer acting in objective good faith reliance upon a warrant issued by a neutral magistrate based on probable cause." This exception requires four elements: (1) objective good-faith reliance, (2) upon a warrant, (3) issued by a neutral magistrate, (4) that is supported by probable cause. It has no application to warrantless searches or seizures — a warrantless search that is later found unlawful cannot be salvaged by an officer's good faith under Article 38.23(b). [In this case, the Search was conducted (state: without a warrant / pursuant to a warrant that lacked probable cause on its face / pursuant to a warrant not issued by a neutral, detached magistrate), and the narrow Article 38.23(b) exception accordingly does not apply.]

6.5 Confession/Statement Suppression Under Article 38.22

To the extent the Evidence includes a statement obtained through custodial interrogation, Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 38.22 — Texas's own statutory confession rule, distinct from both the federal Miranda doctrine and Article 38.23 — independently governs admissibility. Under Article 38.22, § 2, no written statement resulting from custodial interrogation is admissible unless it affirmatively shows that Defendant received the required warnings (the right to remain silent; that any statement may be used against him; the right to have counsel present before and during questioning; the right to appointed counsel if indigent; and the right to terminate the interview at any time) and knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived those rights. Article 38.22, § 3 imposes an electronic-recording requirement for oral statements resulting from custodial interrogation, subject to statutory exceptions, and Section 3(e) requires strict construction of that recording requirement against admissibility.

6.6 Derivative Evidence ("Fruit of the Poisonous Tree")

Suppression must extend to all Evidence derived from the primary illegality, including statements, physical evidence, and investigative leads obtained as a result of the unlawful Search or unlawful interrogation.

7. PRAYER

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Defendant respectfully prays that this Court:

a. Conduct an evidentiary hearing on this Motion pursuant to Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 28.01, § 1(6);
b. GRANT this Motion in all things;
c. Suppress the Evidence, and all fruits thereof, from use by the State for any purpose in this cause; and
d. Grant Defendant such other and further relief to which Defendant may be justly entitled.

Respectfully submitted,

__________________________________
[ATTORNEY NAME]
State Bar No. [SBOT NO.]
[LAW FIRM / ADDRESS]
Phone: [___] Fax: [___]
Email: [___]
ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT

Date: [__/__/____]

8. PROPOSED ORDER

ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE

On this ___ day of __________, 20__, came on to be considered Defendant's Motion to Suppress Evidence. After considering the Motion, the evidence, and argument of counsel, the Court finds that the Motion should be:

☐ GRANTED. It is ORDERED that the Evidence described in the Motion, and all fruits thereof, are SUPPRESSED and shall not be admitted or referred to at trial.

☐ DENIED.

☐ GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART, as follows: [__________________________________].

SIGNED on [__/__/____].

__________________________________
JUDGE PRESIDING

9. VERIFICATION

VERIFICATION (Unsworn Declaration — Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 132.001):

"My name is [DEFENDANT NAME]. My date of birth is [DOB], and my address is [ADDRESS]. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing factual statements are true and correct."

__________________________________
[DEFENDANT NAME] Date: [__/__/____]

10. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that a true and correct copy of this Motion was served on the [COUNTY] County Criminal District Attorney's Office on [DATE] by [METHOD: e-file, hand delivery, email].

__________________________________
[ATTORNEY NAME]