Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
ATAS/421/2007 • CJ GE ATAS/421/2007 Generato dall'IA

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

Numero d'incarto ATAS/421/2007
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Svizzera · Canton Ginevra (CH-GE)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio Respinto (Dismissed)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

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.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

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.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
perquisizione motivi probatori illecita violenza eccezione di incostituzionalità prova del DNA prove acquisite tramite sorveglianza

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
Generato dall'IA

Questioni giuridiche chiave estratte da Legislator

Generato dall'IA
Art. 66 al. 1 LTF

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

Ti chiedi come si applica questa sentenza alla tua fattispecie?

Analizza questa decisione insieme alla legislazione federale e cantonale, ai commentari e alla giurisprudenza successiva in Legislator AI.

Apri in Legislator →

Testo completo

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



+ ,-+    + ,

./  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/