Illegal Search & Seizure: Your Rights & How Evidence Can Be Challenged in Maryland

The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Article 26 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights protect you from police searches and seizures that are unreasonable. These protections established by the Constitution form the basis of criminal procedure and can be the key to a strong defense. If the police infringe on these rights, the evidence they obtain may be excluded from your criminal case.

Knowing your rights and how to fight evidence seized illegally can mean the difference between being found guilty and having your case thrown out. If you think that the evidence in your case was found through an illegal search, talking to a criminal defense lawyer, who is deeply experienced in constitutional rights, can help you figure out your next steps in order to keep your freedom.

Fourth Amendment protections

The Fourth Amendment protects people from the government invading their homes, papers, and belongings without legal justification. In most cases, this protection means that police must get a valid search warrant before they can search your home, car, person, or belongings. There must be a good reason for a warrant, and it must clearly state where to search and what to take.

Extra protection for Maryland residents

Maryland’s Declaration of Rights offers similar protections by saying that general warrants that don’t name a person or place are illegal. Maryland courts have sometimes given these state protections a broader meaning than federal courts have given the Fourth Amendment. This gives Maryland residents extra protection.

Warrant requirements

People can challenge searches that are done without a warrant because they’re thought to be unreasonable. This assumption requires the prosecution to prove that a recognized exception applies to the specific situation to justify any warrantless search.

Common exceptions to the warrant requirement

There are a few situations where searches can happen without a warrant. There are certain things that must be done for each exception to work. Police can’t just say there was an exception after the fact. They have to show that the circumstances made the warrantless search necessary at the time it happened.

Below are the most common warrant exceptions raised in criminal cases.

Consent

If a person voluntarily consents to a search, police do not need a warrant. However, consent can’t be forced. It has to be given freely and willingly. Consent can be taken back at any time, and officers can’t go beyond what the person agreed to.

Search incident to arrest

If the police arrest you legally, they can search the area you have immediate control over for weapons or evidence. Over time, the Supreme Court has made this exception less broad. Even when cell phones are taken as part of an arrest, police need a warrant to search them.

Plain view doctrine

According to the plain view doctrine, police may seize evidence in plain view without a warrant if they are lawfully present at the scene, have lawful access to the object, and have probable cause to believe the item is contraband or evidence of a crime.

Automobile exception

Police can search cars without a warrant if they have probable cause to believe the vehicle contains evidence of a crime.

Exigent circumstances

If there’s an emergency situation that puts someone in immediate danger, threatens to destroy evidence, or is in hot pursuit of a suspect who’s trying to get away, a warrantless entry or search may be justified.

Challenging unlawfully obtained evidence in Maryland

If law enforcement violates your constitutional rights, statutory protections, or fundamental liberties, the court system provides a remedy.

The motion to suppress

If evidence is obtained through an illegal search or seizure, a defendant can file a motion to suppress it. This motion before the trial asks the court to keep the evidence that was illegally obtained from being used in the trial. If the motion is granted, the prosecution won’t be able to use that evidence against you, which could make their case much weaker.

The motion to suppress triggers a suppression hearing where the court looks at how the evidence was acquired. The prosecution is tasked with proving that the search was lawful. Your criminal defense lawyer is able to cross-examine the officers involved, challenge inconsistencies in their testimony, present contradictory evidence, and argue legal issues regarding the application of constitutional protections.

Successful suppression motions can completely transform a case. Without key evidence such as drugs, weapons, or incriminating statements, prosecutors may be unable to prove essential elements of their case and may dismiss charges or negotiate favorable resolutions.

The exclusionary rule and the fruit of the poisonous tree

In many cases, evidence collected in violation of the Fourth Amendment may be excluded from trial, subject to recognized exceptions. The “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine applies this rule to more than just evidence that was directly taken. This means that any new evidence found as a result of the first constitutional violation may also not be admissible.

If the police stop someone for no good reason and find drugs, the drugs may be thrown out, as well as any confession made afterward, information gained from further questioning, and evidence found through leads that came from the illegal stop. The principle greatly broadens the scope of Fourth Amendment protections.

Challenging evidence in weapons and drug cases

Search and seizure issues are very important in drug and weapons cases because the physical evidence is usually necessary for the prosecution. Police often find illegal items during traffic stops or during personal searches that may exceed what the Constitution allows.

A police officer can’t search a car during a routine traffic stop unless they have probable cause to believe the vehicle contains evidence of a crime. A traffic ticket by itself doesn’t give police a good reason to search.

Also, police can’t do a protective frisk unless they have sufficient legal grounds to think the person is armed and dangerous. If the stop didn’t have a good reason or the search went too far under the Constitution, the evidence might not be used, which could end the whole case.

Act quickly to protect your rights after an illegal search in Maryland

When you challenge an illegal search, time is of the essence. As time goes on, evidence like surveillance footage, witness statements, and police memories may become less reliable or not available at all.

There are certain deadlines that must be met when filing motions to suppress. If you hire a criminal defense lawyer early on in your case, they can evaluate the details of your arrest and make sure you get your constitutional rights as soon as possible.

If you think that evidence in your Maryland criminal case was found through an illegal search or seizure, please schedule a consultation with us. At Drew Cochran, Attorney at Law, we can discuss options for challenging the evidence and protecting your constitutional rights.