The Search, Seizure, and Suppression Toolkit

Criminal > Search and Seizure | Published 25 October 2023 - Updated 17 October 2024 | UpLaw - uplaw.us

⚠ Tool 1 goes out in the first week or the case is over. ⭐ Body-worn camera footage and dispatch timestamps decide most ordinary suppression motions, and both erase themselves on a schedule nobody will remind you about.

Companion documents: Analyzing a Search and Filing a Motion to Suppress: A Practical Checklist · Search and Seizure: A Comprehensive Guide to Warrants, Exceptions, Standing, and Suppression · May I Look in the Car: What the Fourth Amendment Actually Requires

---

Tool 1 — Preservation letter

[Date] · VIA EMAIL AND CERTIFIED MAIL

To: [Agency records custodian] · Copy: [Prosecutor]

Re: [Client], case no. ______ — incident of [date] at approximately [time], [location] — DEMAND FOR PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE

This office represents [client]. ⚠ You are directed to preserve, and not to delete, overwrite, or allow the automatic destruction of, the following:

1. ⭐ All body-worn camera recordings from every officer present or arriving, including any pre-event buffer and all recording after the event, unredacted;
2. All dashboard and in-car camera recordings, including any pre-event buffer;
3. All fixed camera recordings from the station, the sally port, the booking area, and any agency-controlled camera with a view of [location];
4. ⭐ All dispatch audio, radio traffic, and computer-aided dispatch entries WITH TIMESTAMPS, including the times of the stop, all unit requests, all unit arrivals, and any canine request and arrival;
5. All automated license plate reader records involving the vehicle;
6. All canine deployment records for the date, and the deployed animal's training records, certification history, and field performance records;
7. All officer notes, including field notes not incorporated into any report;
8. All recordings of any request for consent and any response;
9. All metadata for each recording, including original creation timestamps and any editing history;
10. All reports, including supplemental, corrected, and draft versions.

⚠ We understand your retention period for body-worn camera footage may be as short as [X] days. Please confirm IN WRITING that these materials have been preserved and identify the applicable retention period.

Failure to preserve after this notice may result in a motion for sanctions.

☐ Send within days of appointment or retention. ☐ ⭐ Send separate letters to third-party custodians — the business with a camera, the residence, the transit agency — and follow up in person. ☐ Diary a follow-up in fourteen days. ☐ Move for a court order if no written confirmation arrives. See Issuing a Litigation Hold and Preserving ESI: A Practical Checklist.

---

Tool 2 — Discovery request

Request for Discovery — Fourth Amendment Materials

1. All reports, notes, and memoranda concerning the stop, detention, search, and arrest, including supplemental and corrected versions.
2. ⭐ All video and audio recordings from any source, with metadata.
3. ⭐ All dispatch records, radio logs, and computer-aided dispatch entries with timestamps.
4. The search warrant, the application, the supporting affidavit, and the return.
5. Any consent form, and any recording of a request for consent.
6. All canine records: training curriculum and hours, certification and its issuing body, maintenance training logs, and ⭐ field deployment records showing alerts and whether contraband was recovered.
7. The written inventory policy in effect on the date, and any inventory form completed.
8. The operational plan for any checkpoint, including its stated primary purpose, site selection criteria, and stopping formula.
9. Any forensic extraction report for any device, ⭐ including the tool used, the parameters applied, and any date, file-type, or keyword limitation.
10. Training records and prior suppression-hearing testimony of each officer.
11. Any information concerning an informant relied upon, subject to applicable disclosure limits.
12. Any documentation of the retention period applicable to each recording.

---

Tool 3 — Timeline exhibit

⭐ In a duration case, this table IS the motion. Prepare it as an exhibit and hand it to the court.

Time	Event	Source	Elapsed since stop	Elapsed since mission complete
	Stop initiated	CAD	0:00	—
	First contact	BWC		—
	Documents obtained	BWC		—
	Records check requested	CAD		—
	Records check returned	CAD		—
	⭐ Citation/warning complete	BWC		0:00
	Documents returned to driver	BWC		⚠ Or never returned
	Consent requested	BWC
	Consent refused	BWC
	Second unit requested	CAD
	Canine requested	CAD
	⭐ Canine arrived	CAD/BWC		⚠ This number is the case
	Alert	BWC
	Search commenced	BWC
	Item recovered	BWC

☐ ⭐ Every entry in the last column requires an independent justification. ☐ Cite the exact recording and time index for each row. ☐ Prepare a synchronized clip of the mission-complete moment through the search.

---

Tool 4 — Standing affidavit

DECLARATION OF [CLIENT] IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO SUPPRESS

1. I make this declaration solely to establish my interest in the [place/item] searched. ⭐ I understand that this declaration is offered for the limited purpose of the suppression hearing and is not admissible against me in the prosecution's case in chief.
2. [For a residence] On [date] I was [residing at / staying overnight at / a guest of] ______ at ______. I [kept belongings there / had a key / had stayed there on prior occasions / had permission to be there].
3. [For a vehicle] On [date] I was operating the vehicle described. I [owned it / had rented it / had the permission of ______, the owner or renter, to operate it]. My personal belongings, including ______, were inside.
4. [For an item] The [item] searched was mine. I had not abandoned it, discarded it, or disclaimed ownership of it.
5. I had a subjective expectation that the [place/item] would remain private, and I took the following steps consistent with that expectation: ______.

⚠ Draft this narrowly. ⭐ Establish the interest and nothing more, and confirm the local rule on the use of suppression testimony before filing.

Standing quick reference: ☐ Overnight guest — ⭐ yes; brief commercial visitor — ⚠ no — Minnesota v. Carter, 525 U.S. 83 ☐ Unlisted driver in lawful possession of a rental — ⭐ yes — Byrd v. United States, 584 U.S. 395 ☐ Passenger, as to the stop — ⭐ yes — Brendlin v. California, 551 U.S. 249 ☐ Passenger, as to car compartments — ⚠ generally no — Rakas v. Illinois, 439 U.S. 128

---

Tool 5 — Motion to suppress template

MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE

I. Introduction. Defendant moves to suppress all evidence obtained as a result of the [search of / seizure of] ______ on [date], and all fruits thereof.

II. Facts. [State them specifically, with citations to the recordings by time index. ⚠ Do not plead conclusions.]

III. Standing. Defendant had a legitimate expectation of privacy in ______ because ______. See the attached declaration. [Cite the applicable authority.]

IV. Burden. ⭐ This search was conducted without a warrant. The government therefore bears the burden of establishing that it fell within a recognized exception. [Or: This search was conducted pursuant to a warrant; Defendant bears the burden and meets it because ______.]

V. Argument. A. There was no reasonable suspicion for the stop. [Facts; Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1.] B. ⭐ The stop was unlawfully prolonged. The mission concluded at ______, and the search did not commence until ______, an interval of ______ minutes, during which [what happened]. No independent reasonable suspicion supported the extension. [Rodriguez v. United States; the dog sniff itself is not a search under Illinois v. Caballes, 543 U.S. 405, which is precisely why the extension is the violation.] C. Consent was not voluntary / exceeded in scope / given by a person without authority. [Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218; Illinois v. Rodriguez, 497 U.S. 177; Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. 103.] D. No exception applies. [Address each the government will assert: Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132; Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332; Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752; Brigham City v. Stuart, 547 U.S. 398; Kentucky v. King, 563 U.S. 452; Lange v. California, 594 U.S. 295; Caniglia v. Strom, 593 U.S. 194.] E. The evidence is fruit of the unlawful [stop/search]. [Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471.] F. ⭐ No exception to the exclusionary rule applies. [Address affirmatively: United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897; Herring v. United States, 555 U.S. 135; Davis v. United States, 564 U.S. 229; Utah v. Strieff, 579 U.S. 232; Nix v. Williams, 467 U.S. 431.]

VI. Request for an evidentiary hearing. Material facts are disputed, specifically: ______.

VII. Conclusion.

⚠ File within the deadline — Fed. R. Crim. P. 12 in federal court, and the state analogue elsewhere. ⭐ Calendar it at arraignment.

---

Tool 6 — Franks motion outline

MOTION FOR A FRANKS HEARING

1. The affidavit stated: [quote the challenged statement verbatim, with the paragraph number].
2. The statement is false because: [specific facts, with the offer of proof identified].
3. The affiant knew or recklessly disregarded the truth because: [what the affiant knew, when, and how it is shown].
4. ⭐ The statement was NECESSARY to probable cause. [Set out the affidavit with the false statement excised, and demonstrate that what remains does not establish a fair probability.]
5. Offer of proof. Attached are: [affidavits, records, transcripts, recordings, or a proffer identifying the witnesses and their expected testimony].
6. Relief requested. An evidentiary hearing under Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154, and suppression of all evidence obtained.

⚠ The preliminary showing must be substantial and supported. ⭐ Conclusory allegations draw no hearing. ⭐ And note why this matters strategically: a Franks violation is one of the few routes around good faith under United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, because good faith does not protect an affiant who misled the magistrate.

⭐ Material omissions are treated the same way in most circuits: insert the omitted fact and ask whether probable cause survives.

---

Tool 7 — Cross-examination: duration

⭐ Establish the sequence before playing anything. The officer will not want to commit to times.

Establishing the mission

1. You stopped the vehicle for [violation]?
2. Your purpose was to address that violation?
3. You checked the license, registration, and insurance?
4. You ran a records check?
5. That check came back at ______?
6. ⭐ You completed the citation at ______?
7. At that point you had everything you needed to conclude the stop?

Establishing the extension 8. But you did not hand the documents back at ______, did you? 9. You asked for consent to search? 10. He said no? 11. You did not tell him he was free to go? 12. You requested a canine at ______? 13. ⭐ The canine arrived at ______? 14. That is ______ minutes after the citation was complete? 15. During those ______ minutes, he was not free to leave?

Closing the justification 16. What specific fact, known to you at ______, suggested criminal activity? 17. That fact was known to you before you completed the citation? 18. You did not write it in your report? 19. ⚠ [If the answer is a general observation:] Nervousness is common on a traffic stop, isn't it?

⚠ Do not argue. ⭐ Get the times, then show the recording.

---

Tool 8 — Cross-examination: consent

1. You did not have a warrant?
2. You did not believe you had probable cause to search?
3. That is why you asked?
4. What exactly did you say? [Pin the words.]
5. You did not tell him he could refuse?
6. There were ______ officers present?
7. Your emergency lights were activated?
8. He had not been told he was free to leave?
9. He was standing [where], and you were standing [where]?
10. You still had his license?
11. When he hesitated, you asked again?
12. You said something about how long a warrant would take?
13. ⭐ He never said the word "yes," did he?
14. Scope: he agreed to let you "look in the car"?
15. He did not agree to the removal of the door panel?
16. Nobody asked him again before that happened?

⚠ The government bears the burden of proving voluntariness — Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218. ⭐ Make the record show what was not said.

---

Tool 9 — Specialized records requests

Canine ☐ Training curriculum, hours, and the trainer's credentials ☐ Certification, issuing organization, and standards applied ☐ Maintenance training logs for the preceding year ☐ ⭐ Field deployment records: every alert, and whether contraband was recovered ☐ Handler training and certification ☐ Any record of a false alert or a re-certification failure

Inventory ☐ ⭐ The written policy in effect on the date — ⚠ not the current one ☐ The completed inventory form ☐ Training on the policy ☐ Whether the vehicle was in fact impounded, and under what authority

Checkpoint ☐ ⭐ The operational plan, including the STATED PRIMARY PURPOSE — ⚠ dispositive under City of Indianapolis v. Edmond, 531 U.S. 32, and permitted under Michigan Dep't of State Police v. Sitz, 496 U.S. 444 ☐ Site selection criteria and the approving authority ☐ The stopping formula, and whether it was followed ☐ Advance publicity, signage, and average detention time ☐ Statistical results

Device ☐ The warrant and its scope ☐ ⭐ The extraction report, the tool used, and the parameters applied — date ranges, file types, keywords ☐ Any review protocol or filter procedure ☐ What was reviewed beyond the warrant's scope ☐ Chain of custody for the device ☐ Whether a passcode or biometric was compelled

---

Tool 10 — Remedy assessment

⚠ Complete this BEFORE telling a client what a motion can achieve.

Exception	Applies?	Why not	Authority
Good faith on a warrant	☐	Affiant misled / bare bones / facially deficient / magistrate not neutral	Leon, 468 U.S. 897
Isolated negligence	☐	Systemic or deliberate	Herring, 555 U.S. 135
Binding precedent	☐	No precedent authorized this	Davis, 564 U.S. 229
Knock and announce	☐	Not the basis of this motion	Hudson, 547 U.S. 586
Attenuation	☐	⭐ Close in time; no intervening circumstance; flagrant misconduct	Strieff, 579 U.S. 232
Independent source	☐	No untainted source	Doctrine
Inevitable discovery	☐	Not established by a preponderance	Nix, 467 U.S. 431
Statutory remedy excludes suppression	☐		⚠ Check 18 U.S.C. § 2703, 18 U.S.C. § 2518, Fed. R. Crim. P. 41

Assessment: ☐ Suppression likely ☐ Contested ☐ ⚠ Violation without remedy

⭐ If the last box is checked, say so to the client, and pivot to what the record still supports — a sentencing argument, a civil claim, or leverage in negotiation.

---

Tool 11 — Client advisory card

IF YOU ARE STOPPED

1. Pull over safely. Hands visible. Interior light on at night.
2. Give your license, registration, and insurance. You must.
3. Be polite. Nothing is improved by being difficult.
4. ⭐ If asked to search: "I do not consent to any searches." Say it once, calmly.
5. Ask once: "Am I free to leave?" If yes, go.
6. ⚠ Never physically resist, even a search you believe is illegal. Fight it in court.
7. You may decline to answer questions beyond identifying yourself.
8. ⭐ If arrested: "I am going to remain silent. I want a lawyer." Then stop talking.
9. ⚠ Do not unlock your phone or give your passcode.
10. ⭐ Write down the times as soon as you can — when you were stopped, when you got your license back, when anyone else arrived.

⚠ Saying no is not evidence of anything and cannot be used against you.

---

Tool 12 — Authority reference

Authority	Use
Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347	Reasonable expectation of privacy
United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 · Florida v. Jardines, 569 U.S. 1	Trespass test; curtilage
Kyllo v. United States, 533 U.S. 27	Sense-enhancing technology on a home
Carpenter v. United States, 585 U.S. 296	⭐ Digital location data
Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213	Probable cause; informants
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1	Stop and frisk — two showings
Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806	⚠ Pretext is irrelevant
Illinois v. Caballes, 543 U.S. 405	Dog sniff is not a search
Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119	Flight
Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132	Automobile exception
Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332	⭐ Vehicle search incident to arrest
Collins v. Virginia, 584 U.S. 586	Curtilage limit on the automobile exception
Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752	Search incident to arrest, scope
Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218	Consent voluntariness
Illinois v. Rodriguez, 497 U.S. 177	Apparent authority
Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. 103	⭐ Present objecting occupant
Brigham City v. Stuart, 547 U.S. 398 · Kentucky v. King, 563 U.S. 452	Exigency
Lange v. California, 594 U.S. 295 · Caniglia v. Strom, 593 U.S. 194	⚠ Limits on home entry
Bailey v. United States, 568 U.S. 186	Detention during warrant execution
Sitz, 496 U.S. 444 · Edmond, 531 U.S. 32	Checkpoints; purpose
Rakas, 439 U.S. 128 · Carter, 525 U.S. 83 · Byrd, 584 U.S. 395 · Brendlin, 551 U.S. 249	⭐ Standing
Mapp, 367 U.S. 643 · Wong Sun, 371 U.S. 471	Exclusion and fruits
Leon, 468 U.S. 897 · Herring, 555 U.S. 135 · Davis, 564 U.S. 229 · Hudson, 547 U.S. 586 · Strieff, 579 U.S. 232 · Nix, 467 U.S. 431	⚠ Exceptions to exclusion
Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154	Affidavit challenge
18 U.S.C. § 2703 · § 2518 · § 3103a	Stored data; wiretaps; delayed notice
Fed. R. Crim. P. 41 · 12	Warrants; motion deadlines

---

Tool 13 — Where this touches the rest of the file

Also in play	Read
The data was obtained from a company	The Data You Did Not Know They Had: How Privacy Law Actually Reaches Your Information · Data Privacy and Security: A Comprehensive Guide to Collection, Consent, Breach Response, and Enforcement · The Data Privacy and Breach Response Toolkit · Responding to a Data Breach and Exercising Privacy Rights: A Practical Checklist
An algorithm generated the suspicion	The Model Said No: How Automated Decisions Are Made and How They Are Challenged · Automated Decisions and Artificial Intelligence: A Comprehensive Guide to Disclosure, Bias, and Accountability · The Automated Decision and AI Accountability Toolkit
The detention was for mental health reasons	Held Against Your Will: How Civil Commitment Actually Works and What Rights Attach · Responding to an Emergency Hold or Commitment Petition: A Practical Checklist · The Civil Commitment and Mental Health Rights Toolkit
Evidence must be preserved formally	Issuing a Litigation Hold and Preserving ESI: A Practical Checklist
The client is a servicemember	Servicemember Protections: A Comprehensive Guide to the SCRA, USERRA, and Reemployment Rights

| A vehicle stop produced injuries as well as charges | The First Forty-Eight Hours: What Actually Decides a Car Accident Claim · Handling a Motor Vehicle Collision Claim from Scene to Settlement: A Practical Checklist · The Motor Vehicle Collision Claim Toolkit — ⭐ the same body camera and dispatch records serve both files, and one preservation letter covers them | | A death resulted | Who May Sue and for What: How Wrongful Death Claims Actually Work · Bringing a Wrongful Death or Survival Action: A Practical Checklist · The Wrongful Death and Survival Action Toolkit |

---

Related Documents

• Analyzing a Search and Filing a Motion to Suppress: A Practical Checklist
• Search and Seizure: A Comprehensive Guide to Warrants, Exceptions, Standing, and Suppression
• May I Look in the Car: What the Fourth Amendment Actually Requires
• The Data Privacy and Breach Response Toolkit
• The Automated Decision and AI Accountability Toolkit