A motion made to suppress evidence is made by a criminal when they believe that evidence was gathered in violation of their Fourth Amendment right of freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures (Motion, 2006). If the motion is granted by the court, this is often dispositive of the case because without the evidence, the case cannot proceed. This would be the case in this instance if the court granted the motion. However, there is no guarantee that if the evidence was illegally seized that the judge will suppress it because there are many exceptions to the rule. As long as the police acted in good faith when they violated the defendant's rights, the judge may excuse that conduct and the motion to suppress will be denied.
In this case, the passenger's motion to suppress the seized evidence should not be granted. The search was legal for several reasons. First, the car was parked in a known high-crime area. Second, the officers observed a woman leaning into the car and giving something to the passenger. Third, when the officers approached the car, the woman began to walk away and the passenger was observed making "shoving down" motions suggesting to the officer he may be armed or was trying to hide something.
When the officer told the passenger to let him see his hands, the passenger continued making the shoving down motions before complying with the request. Fourth, when the officer then reached into the car and touched the passenger's pocket, he felt large, hard objects which he believed to be crack cocaine, and subsequently removed a plastic bag from the pocket which contained several rocks of crack cocaine. Another rock of crack cocaine was also found in the passenger's clothing. The total crack cocaine found on the passenger totaled almost 100 grams. The passenger was then arrested.
If an officer claims to have witnessed a street level drug transaction, the Constitution allows the officer to initiate a s...