IN THE [NAME OF COURT]

Commonwealth of Virginia

v.

[DEFENDANT’S FULL LEGAL NAME],
Defendant.

Criminal Case No.: [CASE NUMBER]

MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW

[Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-60 (2023); Va. Sup. Ct. R. 3A:9(b)]

[// GUIDANCE: This template assumes evidence was obtained through a warrantless search or a defective warrant. Insert or delete sections to fit your factual scenario.]

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction & Relief Sought…………………………………………………………… 2
2. Procedural Posture………………………………………………………………………… 2
3. Statement of Relevant Facts…………………………………………………………… 3
4. Governing Legal Standards…………………………………………………………… 4
   4.1 Constitutional & Statutory Framework
   4.2 Burden of Proof
   4.3 Good-Faith Exception (Commonwealth’s Anticipated Argument)
5. Argument……………………………………………………………………………………… 6
   Point I – The Search Was Conducted Without a Valid Warrant
   Point II – No Exception to the Warrant Requirement Applies
   Point III – The Good-Faith Exception Is Inapplicable
6. Conclusion & Prayer for Relief………………………………………………………… 11
7. Request for Hearing……………………………………………………………………… 12
8. Certificate of Service……………………………………………………………………… 13
9. Proposed Order…………………………………………………………………………… 14

1. Introduction & Relief Sought

COMES NOW the Defendant, [DEFENDANT’S NAME] (“Defendant”), by counsel, pursuant to U.S. Const. amend. IV, Va. Const. art. I, § 10, Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-60, and Va. Sup. Ct. R. 3A:9(b), and respectfully moves this Honorable Court for an Order suppressing all tangible and intangible evidence, including but not limited to [DESCRIBE EVIDENCE], obtained as a direct or derivative result of the unlawful search and seizure that occurred on or about [DATE]. Defendant further requests exclusion of any statements derived therefrom under the “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine.

2. Procedural Posture

1. On [DATE], law-enforcement officers of [AGENCY] executed [DESCRIPTION OF SEARCH/SEIZURE].
2. Defendant was indicted/charged on [DATE] with [LIST CHARGES].
3. Trial is currently set for [TRIAL DATE].
4. Pursuant to Va. Sup. Ct. R. 3A:9(b), this Motion is timely filed more than seven (7) days before trial.
5. No previous motions to suppress relating to this incident have been filed.

3. Statement of Relevant Facts

[// GUIDANCE: Provide a concise, chronological narrative. Stick to objective facts and cite to discovery documents, body-cam timestamps, or transcripts by Bates numbers.]

1. At approximately [TIME] on [DATE], Officer [NAME] approached Defendant’s [VEHICLE/RESIDENCE] at [LOCATION].
2. The officer [STATE SPECIFIC ACTIONS—e.g., “opened the vehicle door without consent” or “entered the residence without a warrant”].
3. [DESCRIBE OFFICER’S JUSTIFICATION AS STATED IN POLICE REPORT].
4. During the search, officers recovered [ITEMS SEIZED].
5. Defendant was subsequently interrogated and made statements referencing the seized items.
6. No warrant was presented prior to or during the search, nor was one produced afterward.

4. Governing Legal Standards

4.1 Constitutional & Statutory Framework

a. The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Article I, § 10 of the Virginia Constitution protect individuals against unreasonable searches and seizures.
b. Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-60 authorizes a defendant to move to suppress evidence obtained in violation of constitutional protections.

4.2 Burden of Proof

Once the defendant establishes a prima facie case of an unlawful search, the burden shifts to the Commonwealth to justify the intrusion. The prosecution must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the search fell within a recognized exception or was otherwise lawful.

4.3 Good-Faith Exception (Commonwealth’s Anticipated Argument)

The Commonwealth may argue that suppression is unwarranted under a “good-faith” exception. However, Virginia courts have declined to recognize good-faith outside the narrow confines articulated in United States v. Leon and its progeny. Suppression remains the appropriate remedy where, as here, (i) no warrant existed or (ii) the warrant was facially deficient and reliance objectively unreasonable.

[// GUIDANCE: Insert any Virginia-specific authority your jurisdiction relies on for good-faith. Omit case law citations if unsure.]

5. Argument

Point I – The Search Was Conducted Without a Valid Warrant

1. Officers entered Defendant’s [VEHICLE/RESIDENCE] without first obtaining a judicially authorized search warrant, violating the “firmly drawn” warrant requirement.
2. Absent a warrant, the search is presumptively unreasonable.

Point II – No Exception to the Warrant Requirement Applies

A. Consent
• Any purported consent was not voluntary under the “totality of the circumstances,” as Defendant was [DETENTION STATUS] and no Miranda warnings were yet given.
B. Exigent Circumstances
• The officers report no immediate threat to life or evidence destruction; body-cam shows a controlled scene.
C. Automobile Exception
• Even if the automobile exception were invoked, officers first conducted an exploratory search of closed containers without probable cause specific to each container.

Point III – The Good-Faith Exception Is Inapplicable

1. Officers cannot rely on a non-existent or facially deficient warrant.
2. Objectively reasonable officers would have known that entering without a warrant or exigency violates clearly established constitutional mandates.
3. Excluding the evidence deters future misconduct and preserves judicial integrity, aligning with statutory objectives of Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-60.

6. Conclusion & Prayer for Relief

WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests that this Court:
A. GRANT the Motion to Suppress;
B. EXCLUDE from evidence at trial all items seized on [DATE] and any fruits thereof, including Defendant’s statements; and
C. GRANT such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

Respectfully submitted,

[DEFENDANT’S NAME]
By Counsel

7. Request for Hearing

Pursuant to Va. Sup. Ct. R. 3A:9(c), Defendant requests an evidentiary hearing on this Motion and estimates one (1) half-day will be required.

8. Certificate of Service

I hereby certify that on this ___ day of ____, 20__, a true copy of the foregoing Motion was electronically filed with the Clerk of Court and served via [SPECIFY METHOD] upon the Office of the Commonwealth’s Attorney, [ADDRESS].

[COUNSEL’S NAME], VSB No. [#####]
[LAW FIRM NAME]
[ADDRESS] | [PHONE] | [EMAIL]
Counsel for Defendant

9. Proposed Order

IN THE [NAME OF COURT]
Commonwealth of Virginia v. [DEFENDANT], Case No. [CASE NUMBER]

ORDER
THIS MATTER came before the Court upon Defendant’s Motion to Suppress. Upon consideration of the pleadings, evidence, and argument of counsel, the Court finds that the search of Defendant’s [VEHICLE/RESIDENCE] on [DATE] violated the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution and Article I, § 10 of the Virginia Constitution.
ACCORDINGLY, it is ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED. All physical evidence seized on [DATE] and any derivative evidence, including Defendant’s statements, are hereby SUPPRESSED and shall not be admitted at trial.

ENTERED this ___ day of ____, 20__.

---

Judge

SEEN AND AGREED:

---

Counsel for Defendant Counsel for Commonwealth

[// GUIDANCE:
1. Insert additional specificity (e.g., chain-of-custody flaws, misstatements in warrant affidavit) under Points I–III as needed.
2. Attach supporting exhibits (body-cam footage logs, photographs, transcript excerpts) and reference them in the Statement of Facts.
3. Confirm local-court formatting (margins, font, caption style) before filing.
4. Check local rules for any supplemental certification (e.g., page-limit adherence or scheduling orders).]