legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Wejbe CA4/3
Respondent Matthew Wejbe was charged with multiple crimes after he was found in possession of stolen property during a police encounter. There is no dispute he was unlawfully detained at the outset of the encounter. The only question is whether the Fourth Amendment’s exclusionary rule requires suppression of the stolen property on that basis. Answering that question in the affirmative, the trial court dismissed the charges against Wejbe. On appeal, the People contend the attenuation and inevitable discovery exceptions to the exclusionary rule apply so as to salvage the case. We agree that intervening circumstances attenuated the taint of Wejbe’s unlawful detention. Therefore, we reverse and remand for further proceedings.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale