Howes & Howes, Attorneys at Law

Print This Email This

What is a motion to suppress evidence?

Whenever the police take an action without an arrest or search warrant, they must be able to justify that action under the New Jersey and United States constitutions.  A person accused of a crime can challenge any arrest, confession or seizure of evidence in a proceeding called a motion to suppress evidence.

A motion to suppress evidence is a legal proceeding designed to challenge evidence on constitutional grounds.  Actually, it is a proceeding-within-a-proceeding that is brought by a defendant in a criminal case after the initial accusation or complaint or indictment has been brought.

Defense counsel initiates the motion to suppress evidence by filing formal papers with the court.  The prosecutor and defense counsel then submit legal arguments in an official document known as a brief.  If there has been an arrest or a search without a warrant, then the prosecutor files the first brief.  In the prosecutor’s brief, he or she must justify each step taken by the police.

The defendant then responds with a legal brief explaining how and why the police violated the defendant’s constitutional rights.

After the briefs are submitted, the court then holds a hearing with testimony and exhibits to resolve any contested issues.  The state has the burden of proof at the hearing.  If the court grants the motion to suppress evidence, then the prosecutor is barred from using the challenged evidence against the defendant in court.

The most common evidence challenged are an incriminating document, a confession, a breathalyzer reading or an incriminating item, most frequently drugs.  The most common types of criminal proceedings in which defendants bring motions to suppress evidence are drug cases.  The most common type of traffic court proceeding in which defendants bring motions to suppress evidence are drunk driving cases.

If you have been accused of a crime or a motor vehicle offense and you believe your rights have been violated, then you should contact Howes & Howes.

Election Law Success Stories

While making every vote count and stopping voter fraud are very important policies in America, winning an election is also very important to the candidate and his or her political party.  On rare occasions, winning the election also involves winning a court case.  In those rare cases, you need an election law attorney who is not only experienced, but also has a track record of success.  This article sets forth some of our success stories.


Howes & Howes was on the front lines when the N.J. Supreme Court changed how primary elections work

Liberal Republican gubernatorial candidate Doug Forrester lost several county conventions, and as a result, did not have the good ballot position he had sought.  So he did what an increasing number of politicians have been doing—he brought a lawsuit.  Partner Tim Howes represented Bret Schundler in the litigation, which reached the state Supreme Court.


Legal challenges to your nominating Petition can drain the energy out of your campaign

New Jersey Law requires that a candidate for office obtain a certain number of signatures of registered voters to qualify for a spot on the ballot.  There are a number of other legal requirements for nominating petitions.  If a candidate does not comply with those requirements, then he or she risks a time-consuming legal challenge, or worse, exclusion from the ballot.


This website is provided for informational purposes only and is not intended to constitute legal advice to any reader. No attorney-client relationship between the reader and Howes & Howes, Attorneys at Law is created by this site, and no reader should act or refrain from acting on the basis of any content in this site. One should only rely on the advice of a qualified attorney licensed to practice law in the reader's jurisdiction. The attorneys of Howes & Howes are licensed to practice law only in the State of New Jersey. Content Copyright 2007-2011 Howes & Howes • All rights reserved.