Motion Hearings in Dedham OUI Cases
There are two different types or motion hearings in Dedham OUI cases. An evidentiary motion hearing is one opportunity for lawyers to cross-examine the police officers or any other witnesses in the case. They do this to determine how they are going to testify at trial and also to determine whether or not a client’s rights have been violated.
After the motion hearing, if there is an argument to be made that a accused’s rights have been violated. Therefore, an experienced OUI attorney can then argue that certain evidence should be suppressed.OUI Motion Hearing Process
For a person facing an OUI charge, the defense will file a motion to suppress the stop and exit of a defendant. Essentially in this motion, the defense is looking to see if the police officer had reasonable suspicion to stop the person and then to order them out of the vehicle.
Often, this also is an opportunity for the defense to see how the officer is going to testify about the operator’s driving ability and their reaction time. Another common motion is a motion to suppress a search of the client’s vehicle, which happens a lot in cases in which somebody is pulled over and has alcohol in the car.Expectations After the Motion Hearing is Filed
Once a motion hearing is filed, it will then be scheduled, so the actual motion in and of itself has to be filed in the court. It is provided to the District attorney’s office. The District attorney’s office will summon witnesses for that motion hearing and then it will be scheduled, typically about a month or a month and a half out.
In Dedham, there is no formal written response from the District attorney’s office. They reserve their argument for the date of the motion hearing and then on the date of the motion, they call their witness, they get direct testimony from that witness, and they make an argument in opposition to the defense counsel’s motion.Understanding the Motion to Suppress Evidence Process
Defense counsel will file a motion to suppress evidence if they believe that the individuals rights have been violated in some way. Due to that violation, certain evidence should be suppressed. Defense counsel will file motion hearings in Dedham OUI cases if they believe that a defendant was interrogated without being mirandized.
They will make the argument at the hearing and, depending on the officer’s testimony, the defense counsel will make an argument that any statements made were in violation of the defendant’s Miranda rights. Defense counsel will be looking to suppress those statements. The same process applies for a motion to suppress any sort of physical evidence such as alcohol in the car.
The process begins with the motion being filed, the officer is summoned to appear, and defense counsel has an opportunity to cross-examine the police officer and make an argument that the police officer violated the client’s rights to their Fourth Amendment rights. If the counsel is successful in their argument, then evidence such as alcohol from the car would be suppressed.What is a Motion to Compel Discovery?
Defense counsel will often use a motion hearings in Dedham OUI cases to preserve evidence, typically with respect to a booking video. They would make an argument that asks the court to order the police to preserve any video. However, they do not use a motion to compel discovery because the Commonwealth is already under an obligation to provide any sort of discovery that they have in their custody and control.
The most common motions filed in an OUI case would be the motion to preserve any video evidence and Rule 17 motions to get surveillance video or medical records. Other common motions include the motion to suppress statements, the motion to suppress search of the vehicle, and the motion to suppress the stop and exit order.Benefit of Speaking to an Attorney
The defense attorney will have a motion hearing to determine whether or not the officer had a warrant and, if they did not have a warrant, to see if any of the exceptions to the warrant requirement applied. If there is an argument that the officers violated the defendant’s rights with respect to the search of the vehicle, the defense attorney would make an argument that any alcohol found in the car be suppressed at trial.