Search Warrants and Warrantless Conduct (Part 2)

by Fred Sisto | Feb 11, 2019 | Blog, Criminal Law, Monmouth County, New Jersey, Ocean County

The Court continued in relevant part: Defendants filed a motion to suppress evidence seized “without a warrant.” In response, the State challenged that framing of the issue and relied on the search warrant to validate the initial stop. The trial court held a conference with defense counsel and the State. The parties engaged in substantial argument regarding the manner in which the motion should proceed and which party would have the burden at each phase. The court noted the existence of “warrantless aspects” to the suppression motion. Based on the conference, the trial court issued an updated scheduling order and directed the State to establish the legality of the “warrantless aspects” of the motion— namely, the initial motor vehicle stop. Defendants would bear the burden on any challenges to the validity of the subsequent search warrant.

On the day of the suppression hearing, instead of presenting proofs to establish the legality of the stop, the State again requested that the court shift the entire burden to the defense. The trial court ordered the proceeding to begin with the State having the initial burden of proof. The State announced that it would not go forward with evidential proceedings. The court admonished the State and ordered that it begin with the presentation of testimony. The State called no witnesses. Finding that the State had failed to meet its burden, the court granted defendants’ motion to suppress. The court suppressed all evidence seized—including the evidence seized pursuant to the search warrant under the “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine.

The State filed a motion for leave to appeal to the Appellate Division, which promptly denied that motion. The Court granted the State leave to appeal. 229 N.J. 255 (2017).

This sort of obstinate behavior by prosecutors is more common than people think. They are aware that very few judges will charge them with contempt in situations in which a private attorney would be charged. This is due in large part to the political power that is wielded by prosecutors’ offices.

      Excellent rating  
 Based on 288 reviews 
    
  
 
 
      Mr Sisto is an excellent lawyer. The tickets I received were nothing compared to the charges i had originally. I got the best possible outcome for my case, and Mr Sisto was incredibly understanding and patient and responded to any questions I had within about 30 minutes of me asking them. I'll be going to him again for any legal trouble I have in the future
     Brandon K 
 
 
 
 
    mr. fred sisto esq. was very professional, answered all questions i had, & made my husband & i feel more at ease about our criminal case.
     Meridith T 
 
 
 
 
    Fred never represented me but been in touch with him a few times and was a very professional experience from the minute I called the office
     Jj B 
 
 
 
 
    Fred is a very competent attorney.  He is knowledgeable, thorough, effective and possesses outstanding interpersonal skills. He provided excellent representation in my case and obtained a favorable outcome.
     Michael G 
 
 
 
 
    Fred Sisto's attention to detail, his representation and unwavering advocacy for me made all the difference in my case.
     Jill F 
 
 
 
 
    Hired Mr.Sisto to handle a case of mine a couple of months ago and while the service was okay the customer service was awful. When I had inquired about a charge I was unsure of on my bill, Mr. Sisto immediately got defensive and had the unprofessionalism to ask me if I “was high” for asking this question. I wonder if Mr. Sisto asks all of his clients this question or only the ones who have jobs in the cannabis industry? Regardless, I don’t believe this was an appropriate question to ask, regardless of the industry one works in, and therefore Mr. Sisto needs to heavily work on his customer service. Edit: Mr. Sisto had the UNPROFESSIONALISM to reach out to my family and ask them to ask me to take down my review instead of reaching out directly towards me when it was I who was his client, not my family. Clearly speaks to the unprofessionalism surrounding this practice. This has not been the only time Mr.Sisto has gone directly to my family instead of me, his client, for important legal matters and I will not seek out his services again. For those who may not understand Spanish, the email starts with “You should speak to your daughter regarding the review she has just published.” Edit to Response: As an attorney, one should be able to make appropriate questions and comments regardless if a client is “uncooperative” or “disrespectful.” The fact that rather than apologizing for the awful interaction with your firm, and I was not released  “within hours” as you claim shows how low value your firm is and how you openly  instead chose to harass my family through email for my initial review rather than actually revomy case which I ended up doing and you chareged me for . Regardless of results, your character speaks volumes and anyone who reads this would know better than to give their money to an awful person such as yourself. What a shame
     Ximena C 
 
 
 
 
    Mr. Sisto was knowledgeable preofessional and experienced. He knew the right steps to take every step of the way and went above and beyond to make sure that I understood the situation. Mr. Sisto will have your back in any legal matter!
     Corey S 
 
 
 
 
    2 👍🏻👍🏻 up
     Cc 
 
 
 
 
    Very informative. Would not hesitate to use Attorney Sisto.
     Rose C 
 
 
 
 
    Realmente es un gran abogado, me ayudo muchísimo en todo este proceso y sobre todo que habla español que es una de las cosas importantes para mi. Por que lo hizo mas entendible y facil cada una de las cosas que tenía que hacer y su amabilidad y paciencia para poder explicarme qué tenía que hacer. Además que mi caso fue un éxito gracias a él ya cada uno de sus conocimientos y a su apoyo en todo momento. Lo recomiendo 100%.
     Luis A