Collective Knowledge and Limits on Hearsay at Suppression Hearings

This wikilog article is a draft, it was not published yet.

by: Ryan • September 15, 2015 • no comments

From fourthamendment.com:

When the state relies on the collective knowledge doctrine, it is required to call the officers involved in both ends of it. Merely having the searching officer testify to hearsay as to what the first officer did is inadequate, even if hearsay is otherwise admissible in suppression hearings. “In summary, on a motion to suppress challenging the sufficiency of a stop or warrantless arrest for lack of probable cause, the State can satisfy its burden in one of two ways. The State can present evidence that the arresting officers themselves possessed the requisite knowledge to establish probable cause, or by introducing evidence that a fellow police officer with the requisite knowledge communicated that information to, and/or directed the officers on scene to make the arrest. Under the latter, the State must persuade the Court that the requisite knowledge was in fact communicated in order to rely upon the collective knowledge doctrine. Otherwise, it follows that the arresting officer acted without reasonable suspicion or probable cause.” State v. Holmes, 2015 Del. Super. LEXIS 462 (September 3, 2015).