Appellant Name: Mary Burrows
Appellant Attorney(s): Mary Burrows
Appellant Attorney(s): Mary Burrows
Trial Docket Number: #23-CM-0111
Presiding Trial Judge: Judge Bret Hyland
Notice of Appeal Filed: #23-CM-0111, State of San Andreas v. Kevin Reyes
Presiding Trial Judge: Judge Bret Hyland
Notice of Appeal Filed: #23-CM-0111, State of San Andreas v. Kevin Reyes
- [X] Before Verdict
[ ] After Verdict
Reason for Notice of Appeal:
- [X] Motion to be overturned
[ ] Errors in the trials procedure
[ ] Errors in the judge's interpretation of the law
[ ] New evidence proving appellants innocence
- The defense asserts that the search conducted on Mr. Kevin Reyes was unlawful, citing a violation of his Fourth Amendment rights under the Constitution of San Andreas. However, the prosecution contends that the search was conducted within the bounds of the law, with due authorization and probable cause.
The defense argues that the search lacked the necessary authorization or probable cause to justify its intrusive nature. However, the prosecution submits that the search was based on probable cause supported by the circumstances surrounding the alleged bank robbery, where Mr. Reyes matched the same shoes, pants and a very particular necklace as the suspect shown in the robbery. This information, provided sufficient legal grounds for law enforcement officials to conduct the search.
The defense further claims that the search was conducted without appropriate consent from Mr. Reyes and lacked the requisite procedural steps. Nonetheless, the prosecution maintains that law enforcement officers acted within the confines of their authority, issuing a lawful order due to probable cause. They have internal policies that allow them to conduct their investigation to see if the defendant is guilty or not, if the judge and defense thinks that this is in violation of the Fourth Amendment then that is a discussion they need to have with LSPD. The interference by Attorney Jacob Schmidtt during the execution of this lawful order does not invalidate the legality of the order itself.
The prosecution would also like to bring attention to #23-CM-0105, State of San Andreas v. Antonio Vitto where the defendant was found guilty of GM10 - Failure to Comply/Identify because of his refusal to to law enforcement officers during an investigation.
The defense's citation of Exhibit 3, stating that the search was conducted "without evidence to gain evidence," is misleading. The evidence presented in court clearly establishes probable cause based on the matching attire and the the tattoos shown in the still bodycam image which could easily match the defendant. Law enforcement officers were acting in accordance with established legal principles and internal policies.
In light of the constitutional violation not being adequately demonstrated by the defense, the prosecution urges the court to reconsider its decision to grant the Motion to Suppress. The search conducted on Mr. Kevin Reyes was lawful, with proper authorization, probable cause, and adherence to procedural steps. Excluding the evidence obtained from this lawful search would undermine the integrity of the legal process and hinder the pursuit of justice.
