- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Attorney for Covington woman in Causeway wreck moves to suppress evidence
Posted on 7/9/18 at 12:48 pm
Posted on 7/9/18 at 12:48 pm
NOLA Advocate
If I was the judge, I'd be like LOL..no. Ahh what it takes to be a defense lawyer.
quote:
The attorney for a Covington woman accused of driving drunk and killing a man in a fatal Causeway wreck last year has asked a judge to suppress any blood samples, statements and breath analysis taken by police during the investigation, court documents show.
quote:
It was Matte's third driving while intoxicated arrest.
If I was the judge, I'd be like LOL..no. Ahh what it takes to be a defense lawyer.
This post was edited on 7/9/18 at 12:49 pm
11
Posted on 7/9/18 at 12:49 pm to Areddishfish
Important detail you left out...
quote:
Ralph Whalen, who represents Olivia Matte, argues in a brief one-page motion that the evidence, including any documents, books, papers or writing that the state current has were seized in an unconstitutional search.
This post was edited on 7/9/18 at 12:52 pm
Posted on 7/9/18 at 12:49 pm to Areddishfish
Posted on 7/9/18 at 12:50 pm to Areddishfish
You wouldn't consider the grounds for the motion?
Posted on 7/9/18 at 12:51 pm to Golfer
quote:
Important detail you left out of the motion
Meh, of course the attorney is going to argue along those lines, it's about the only defense he can give her
Posted on 7/9/18 at 12:51 pm to Areddishfish
frick that guy for doing his job! Rabble!
Posted on 7/9/18 at 12:52 pm to Golfer
quote:
Important detail you left out of the motion.
Also important detail left out
quote:
The motion does not specify why the seizure was unconstitutional.
Posted on 7/9/18 at 12:52 pm to Golfer
Further in the article, the lawyer doesn't say why it's unconstitutional. If you are clearly intoxicated at a wreck, breath analysis and blood samples are definitely going to be taken. I think this is just a lame attempt of the lawyer to get it thrown out.
Posted on 7/9/18 at 12:53 pm to Areddishfish
quote:
If I was the judge, I'd be like: now that you're all set for the appeal, can we just skip ahead to the conviction?
Posted on 7/9/18 at 12:54 pm to Areddishfish
quote:
Further in the article, the lawyer doesn't say why it's unconstitutional. If you are clearly intoxicated at a wreck, breath analysis and blood samples are definitely going to be taken. I think this is just a lame attempt of the lawyer to get it thrown out.
It very well may have been a constitutional search, and this woman clearly has a problem. But I'm not going to ignore a person's due process and 4th amendment rights because they are a shitty person.
Posted on 7/9/18 at 12:57 pm to Areddishfish
quote:
I think this is just a lame attempt of the lawyer to buy her more time,
FIFY
Because she's going to jail at some time...
Posted on 7/9/18 at 12:57 pm to Packer
quote:
Also important detail left out
quote:
The motion does not specify why the seizure was unconstitutional.
i guess it's just a broad, generic MTS to avoid pretrial deadlines
Posted on 7/9/18 at 1:02 pm to Areddishfish
quote:
The motion does not specify why the seizure was unconstitutional.
Of course it doesn't.
Posted on 7/9/18 at 1:05 pm to Areddishfish
quote:
Ahh what it takes to be a defense lawyer.
I’d take a defense attorney, who gets murderers off, than a scumbag like Gordon or Bart Bernard
Posted on 7/9/18 at 1:06 pm to Areddishfish
quote:
Further in the article, the lawyer doesn't say why it's unconstitutional. If you are clearly intoxicated at a wreck, breath analysis and blood samples are definitely going to be taken. I think this is just a lame attempt of the lawyer to get it thrown out.
The ol' "I was drunk and therefore couldn't give consent" defense?
Posted on 7/9/18 at 1:07 pm to Areddishfish
The fruit of the poisonous tree
Posted on 7/9/18 at 1:41 pm to Areddishfish
quote:
If you are clearly intoxicated at a wreck, breath analysis and blood samples are definitely going to be taken
With consent. Otherwise they need a warrant.
If she was conscience, and didn't give her consent, they better have gotten a warrant
Posted on 7/9/18 at 1:50 pm to Areddishfish
It's a standard motion that every defense attorney files in every case.
Ralph Whalen is a top-tier defense attorney.
Ralph Whalen is a top-tier defense attorney.
Posted on 7/9/18 at 1:51 pm to magildachunks
quote:
With consent. Otherwise they need a warrant. If she was conscience, and didn't give her consent, they better have gotten a warrant
In the event of a MVI involving a death, I'm 99% sure the officers can take a blood sample without obtaining a warrant first.
Posted on 7/9/18 at 1:52 pm to Areddishfish
quote:
If I was the judge, I'd be like LOL..no. Ahh what it takes to be a defense lawyer.
Yea, frick a citizen's rights, huh?
Not saying the evidence was or wasn't properly obtained, or that this chick deserves anything other than a jail cell, but that's a mighty slippery slope.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News