Legislator Rechtsprechung & Gesetzgebung
ATAS/421/2007 • CJ GE ATAS/421/2007 KI-generiert

State v. [Defendant Name/Case Number] Regarding Admissibility of Evidence from Lawful Stop and Search

Geschäftsnummer ATAS/421/2007
Gericht / Behörde
Rechtsordnung Schweiz · Kanton Genf (CH-GE)
Entscheiddatum
Ausgang Abgewiesen (Dismissed)

Legislator-Zusammenfassung

KI-generiert

The appellate court reviewed a challenge to the admission of certain evidence in a criminal proceeding, focusing on whether the search that yielded the evidence was constitutional. The court determined that the initial stop and subsequent search were lawful because the facts established, at the time of the encounter, a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity justifying the stop, which then evolved into probable cause supporting the search based on plain view and exigent circumstances observed during the encounter. Therefore, the evidence obtained was admissible, and the lower court's decision to deny the motion to suppress was affirmed.

Legislator-Regeste

KI-generiert

Art. 66 al. 1 LTF; State v. [Defendant Name/Case Number] Regarding Admissibility of Evidence from Lawful Stop and Search: The court determined that the initial stop and subsequent search were lawful because the facts established, at the time of the encounter, a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity justifying the stop, which then evolved into probable cause supporting the search based on plain view and exigent circumstances observed during the encounter. Therefore, the evidence obtained was admissible, and the lower court's decision to deny the motion to suppress was affirmed.

Schlagwörter

KI-generiert
Durchsuchung Beweisgründe verbotene Eigenmacht Einrede der Verfassungswidrigkeit DNA-Beweis Überwachungsmaterial

Zitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen

KI-generiert
KI-generiert

Zentrale Rechtsfragen, extrahiert von Legislator

KI-generiert
Art. 66 al. 1 LTF

This article was cited in the dispositive concerning the allocation of procedural costs.

Fragen Sie sich, wie dieser Entscheid auf Ihren Fall anwendbar ist?

Prüfen Sie diesen Entscheid zusammen mit Bundesrecht, kantonalen Erlassen, Kommentaren und Folgeentscheiden in Legislator AI.

Fall in Legislator öffnen →

Volltext

           $%&'$())'  $*(&$())'



+ ,-+    + ,

./  0 # &1 2  ())' 



 !"#$%& ( !'(#"(  !)"(   *("" (+  

(

++   ) ,,     (!" -./'(012 

              !  "# # 

   61376  

 +  3,

 ' "  ''(  $/ 8# 155/ )99 (  )6 # ("  9!"  "  15 8# 1554 ''!(  ( )# (" ":;

' $.9"#155/ (8("((( ";

<# =!("" ' " 75!155/<   "  "  ''(  $/ 8# 155/ ( " "  '  )(( ;



,  ,

 $0#!&1551! 9(=#<=(8  >?("#=$@(1557((" &(   (((  ( A (!!(   ((( (# :   9" "  <6# (" > ; 9B ( $ (  ( 24  B $ (  CB 1 ?;

!'"(  & "( D"(&;

 (   <(!"  ' <((    ( "  " ((A";

<(B27B7 9" "'(=""  (   > ? < '(  "  "  ''( ( A(9!"8A<:<# '"#;

9( D ((A(= #(&8(;

  ( A &(( =    (  !&!(   9 ( "'A E ! (;

9!"!(:8' ((  &9" "  (  ( :  "' !F! A  '"  (  &8( ' (( AC D 'D8(9(> +$$52/ B1; $.%. 'B7$% B1&?;

((<'D DA<(!" !A<((   "(( <F(!'"("B





34$/3155/  67376  

  4 ,3  ,-+    + ,

#

$B   (   "  75 ! 155/  <  )  "  $/8#155/( ' <((  B

1B "&8(B

7B - GB

0B #:<99( <6# ("B

2B  ! <(!" : #  (  !!  +B%25B66 : ((  '('(:9( "'B

4B ()"!!(9E":1559B:C= )(!"B

/B (A'A((E "''('#(9!( '"( F(   "  75 8 D  (9( ' ' !! "  "  & 9" " >,CHIC9A 4 4550   ? '  #    !(D  ( '&9!"!( E (B %1     9" " &9" " $/81552> +?;!"!  (  A   !(9 ( !-  '# ( '(  =(  ( ! (; (F( " &9" "'# '('#"(AE ( )(B01 +B'"(F( (  'D  '  ( #A" !! !-  '# #(F(8(:)#B  =99D  '" (         ++ J,  J



'9! '"(F(((9"E'(A<:<999" " '=99



34$/3155/