Hindman & Lanzon Hindman & Lanzon
Call for a Free Consultation
865-223-6450

November 2011 Archives

State Wins a Missing Evidence Appeal

In the previous post, the recent case of State v. Clark, E2009-01795-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn.Crim.App. 10-24-2011) was discussed regarding the search and seizure issue in that case. There was also a missing evidence issue. In addition to excluding evidence, the trial court also dismissed the indictment due to finding that other evidence which had been in the control of the State had been lost and that it was impossible for the Defendant to receive a fair trial due to the State having lost potentially exculpatory evidence (citing State v. Ferguson, 2 S.W.3d 912 (Tenn. 1999). The State appealed this ruling and prevailed.

State Wins a Missing Evidence Appeal

In the previous post, the recent case of State v. Clark, E2009-01795-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn.Crim.App. 10-24-2011) was discussed regarding the search and seizure issue in that case. There was also a missing evidence issue. In addition to excluding evidence, the trial court also dismissed the indictment due to finding that other evidence which had been in the control of the State had been lost and that it was impossible for the Defendant to receive a fair trial due to the State having lost potentially exculpatory evidence (citing State v. Ferguson, 2 S.W.3d 912 (Tenn. 1999). The State appealed this ruling and prevailed.

State Wins a Missing Evidence Appeal

In the previous post, the recent case of State v. Clark, E2009-01795-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn.Crim.App. 10-24-2011) was discussed regarding the search and seizure issue in that case. There was also a missing evidence issue. In addition to excluding evidence, the trial court also dismissed the indictment due to finding that other evidence which had been in the control of the State had been lost and that it was impossible for the Defendant to receive a fair trial due to the State having lost potentially exculpatory evidence (citing State v. Ferguson, 2 S.W.3d 912 (Tenn. 1999). The State appealed this ruling and prevailed.

State Wins a Search and Seizure Appeal

Most appeals of search and seizure evidentiary rulings in criminal cases are appeals by a Defendant after a conviction. However, as these are legal rulings by a trial court, the State has the option of appealing a ruling excluding evidence. In the recent case of State v. Clark, E2009-01795-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn.Crim.App. 10-24-2011), the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals reversed a trial court ruling excluding evidence obtained during the warrantless search of the vehicle of a suspect in the vandalism of a red light camera.

State Wins a Search and Seizure Appeal

Most appeals of search and seizure evidentiary rulings in criminal cases are appeals by a Defendant after a conviction. However, as these are legal rulings by a trial court, the State has the option of appealing a ruling excluding evidence. In the recent case of State v. Clark, E2009-01795-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn.Crim.App. 10-24-2011), the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals reversed a trial court ruling excluding evidence obtained during the warrantless search of the vehicle of a suspect in the vandalism of a red light camera.

State Wins a Search and Seizure Appeal

Most appeals of search and seizure evidentiary rulings in criminal cases are appeals by a Defendant after a conviction. However, as these are legal rulings by a trial court, the State has the option of appealing a ruling excluding evidence. In the recent case of State v. Clark, E2009-01795-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn.Crim.App. 10-24-2011), the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals reversed a trial court ruling excluding evidence obtained during the warrantless search of the vehicle of a suspect in the vandalism of a red light camera.

map map

Hindman & Lanzon
550 West Main Street
Suite 550
Knoxville, TN 37902

Toll Free: 866-383-1545
Phone: 865-223-6450
Fax: 865-521-6371
Knoxville Law Office Map

Review Us