P. v. Ruhman
Defendant pleaded guilty to various criminal offenses following the denial of his motion to suppress evidence. Appellant complains the investigating officer lacked reasonable suspicion to detain him and therefore the trial court should have suppressed the evidence seized during a subsequent search of his person. court agree defendant was illegally detained and the evidence should have been suppressed as a direct product of the detention. Accordingly, court reverse.
Comments on P. v. Ruhman