Suppression hearings in criminal cases almost always feel like fools’ errands. Oh, there are discovery nuggets to be gathered, and from time to time a law enforcement officer will lock himself into some outrageous version of events that makes for good ammunition at trial. But how often do judges really suppress evidence?
U.S. District Court Judge Janet Bond Arterton recently suppressed a statement made by a defendant in a federal criminal case. She did so in the face of testimony by government agents that the witness had been read his Miranda rights. It was a courageous decision on the judge’s part, and restores a sense of confidence in the court.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
