Physical evidence is crucial for police and prosecutors looking to secure a conviction. While convictions can sometimes be secured without physical evidence, its presence greatly enhances their chance of success.
There are rules, however, on how evidence can be collected. When the authorities don’t follow the rules, the evidence can end up being excluded from use. Disputes over what evidence is admissible in court are common in many criminal trials. If an attorney can show that the search or collection of evidence was unlawful, they can ask the court to exclude it — and that can lead to a dismissal of the charges or a favorable verdict later.
What could lead to exclusion?
You need to look at how, where and when the police got the evidence. If they found it in a public place, then they probably have the right to present it in court. If they took it from private property, things could be more complex.
Generally, the police need a warrant or the permission of the property owner to enter private premises and look for evidence. There are a few exceptions, but that is the general rule. If they jumped over your fence in the night with no warrant in place and without anyone’s knowledge, then it may well have been an unlawful search.
Maybe they did have a warrant, but it expired at midnight Thursday, and they began the search at two in the morning on Friday. Alternatively, perhaps the warrant was only for the garage, but they seized the item from the main house. In such cases, you would have a good chance to argue that the evidence was unlawfully obtained and should therefore be excluded from court. As with all defense options, legal guidance is wise.
