Motion to Suppress

By: Derek Hawkins//January 12, 2016//

Listen to this article

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: United States of America v. Iaad Hamad

Case No.:14-3813

Officials: BAUER, RIPPLE, and ROVNER, Circuit Judges.

Practice Area: Motion to Suppress

Appellant voluntarily given incriminating statements given after arrest are not suppressed. Ordinance sufficient to replace need for search warrant

“Hamad’s contention that the court should have also suppressed the incriminating statements he later made to the police was entirely dependent on his claim that the Ordinance was not an adequate substitute for a search warrant. Because we have determined that the district court did not plainly err in finding the Ordinance adequate, we must also conclude that the court did not err in allowing Hamad’s incriminating statements into evidence. We need not decide whether, in the alternative, the evidence could have been admitted under the inevitable discovery doctrine.”

Affirmed

Full Text

Attorney Derek A. Hawkins is the managing partner at Hawkins Law Offices LLC, where he heads up the firm’s startup law practice. He specializes in business formation, corporate governance, intellectual property protection, private equity and venture capital funding and mergers & acquisitions. Check out the website at www.hawkins-lawoffices.com or contact them at 262-737-8825.

Select Region or Brand

Upcoming Event