Memorandum of Points and Authorities AKA Trail Court Brief Essay

Memorandum of Points and Authorities AKA Trail Court Brief - evidence ExampleSTATEMENT OF CASE Marco Velasco, the DEFENDANT, of legal age, running with friends within the vicinity of San Diego Middle School was comprehended by authorities after they have ran inside and then exited of the SDMS campus with various items in their hands. Defendant was memory a starter vase, while the rest held a bottom of a lamp, a chair leg, and a candlestick. That the four teenagers were seen by campus security policemans Miguel Martinez and Marvin DaSilvia on said vicinity. It so happened that Martinez recalled that defendant was a member of a gang and also attended San Diego Middle School. The security officers overheard one of the teenagers in the group of defendant shout, Hes over there Subsequently, the campus security officers yelled to the group to Stop several times but the group of defendant continued running until they went towards the exit of the campus, of which they were subsequently apprehended by Officer Jael Waddle. In the process, the glass vase held by defendant was confiscated and used as evidence to press charges against defendant in usurpation of piece 12024 of the US penal Code, specifically self-discipline of deadly weapon. The incuring officers, however, failed to secure search visage for possession of deadly weapons for defendant prior to arrest. This, in the assumption that defendant was a violent somebody who was about to assault a soulfulness with the deadly weapon glass vase. Defendant was illegally arrested and his possession confiscated without probable cause. ARGUMENT THE COURT SHOULD REVERSE DECICION TO DETAIN DEFENDANT FOR VIOLATION OF PENAL CODE 12024 repayable TO ILLEGAL ARREST AND LACK OF PROBABLE CAUSE. Defendant Marco Velasco, charged with felony for single count of violation of section 12024 of the United States Penal Code, contends that the trial court erred in finding sufficient probable cause to exempt his arrest. As a resu lt, the glass vase held by Defendant during his arrest wrongly assumed as a deadly weapon used against defendant, should have been suppressed. A. Defendant Was Illegally Detained Although defendant was immediately arrested upon apprehension and was never actually detained for investigative purposes, defendant submits that there lacks sufficient cause to justify lawful detention. This fact is distinguished because after defendants illegal detention and arrest, he was charged with violation of California Penal Code Section 12024. Arrest and detention is lawful if the circumstances known or apparent to the officer includes specific articulable facts for the officer to suspect any criminal activity is happening and the person he intends to arrest is involved in that criminal activity (Tony C 1978 21 Cal.3d 888, 890). In Brown v. Texas (1979, 443 U.S. 47), it was stated that, encroachment on interests prohibited by the Fourth Amendment and requires a reasonable suspicion based on artic ulable facts relating to the person or his or her conduct in order to be lawful, in consideration of alleging that a glass vase on defendants possession was a deadly weapon. The Fourth Amendment protects the right of the people to be secure in their persons, house, papers, and effects, against