UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

	__________________ DISTRICT OF TEXAS
										
	__________________  DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA	§
	§
v.	§	__________________
	§	
_______________________________               §

	MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE

TO THE HONORABLE ///, JUDGE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE /// DISTRICT OF TEXAS, /// DIVISION:

	COMES NOW ///, Defendant in the above styled and numbered cause, and files this his/her motion to suppress certain evidence that was illegally acquired by the government and for cause would show the court as follows:
The Defendant moves the court to suppress the following evidence:
	a.	All statements made, whether written or oral, and such other actions of this defendant, which occurred at or subsequent to his/her arrest on ///.
	b.	All books, letters, notes, records, documents and other tangible things that were seized from ///.
	c.	Any and all documents, books, records, notes or other tangible things that were seized from the Defendant’s motor vehicle on or about ///.

	d.	The testimony of any law enforcement officers, agents and all other persons working in connection with such officers and agents, and all persons present at or near the location of the arrest of the Defendant [and the search of his/her office and automobile] in regard to any statements or evidence acquired or objects seized as set forth in paragraphs a, b and c above.
	II.
	As grounds for this motion the Defendant would show the court the following:
	a.	The arrest of the Defendant was made without a warrant and without probable cause in violation of his/her rights under the Fourth, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.  Beck v. Ohio, 85 S.Ct. 223, 379 U.S. 89, 13 L.Ed.2d 142 (1964); Payton V. New York, 100 S.Ct. 1371, 445 U.S. 573, L.Ed.2d 639 (1980).
	b.	All statements made by the Defendant at the time of and subsequent to her arrest were products of his\her illegal arrest.  Dunnaway v. New York, 99 S.Ct. 2248, 442 U.S. 200 60 L.Ed.2d 824 (1979); Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 83 S.Ct. 407, 9 L.Ed.2d 441 (1963); Fourth, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, United States Constitution.
	c. 	Any statement made by the Defendant was not freely nor voluntarily made but was given as a result of compulsion and/or persuasion.  Jackson v. Denno, 378 U.S. 368, 84 S.Ct. 1774, 12 L.Ed. 2d 908 (1964); Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed. 2d 694 (1966); Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, United States Constitution.
	d.	Statements given by the Defendant were made as a result of an interrogation that occurred when the Defendant did not have advice of counsel, after he/she had invoked his\her right to counsel, in violation of the rights guaranteed to his\her by the Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments, United States Constitution.  Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477, 101 S.Ct. 1880, 68 L.Ed. 2d 378 (1981).
	e.	Statements were made by the Defendant without counsel after arraignment and after he\she had invoked his\her right to counsel, in violation of his\her right to effective assistance of counsel under the Sixth Amendment, United States Constitution.  Michigan v. Jackson, 106 S.Ct. 1404 (1986).
	f.	That any alleged waivers by the Defendant of rights secured to him\her under the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution were not valid because they were not voluntary and/or not a knowing and intelligent relinquishment of such rights.  Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458, 58 S.Ct. 1019, 82 L.Ed. 1461 (1938); Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218, 93 S.Ct. 2041, 36 L.Ed. 2d 854 (1973); Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477, 101 S.Ct. 1880, 68 L.Ed. 2d 378 (1981); Michigan v. Jackson, 106 S.Ct. 1404 (1986).
	g.	That the search of the Defendant's automobile was without a warrant and without probable cause and any consent to search was not voluntary.  Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443, 91 S.Ct. 2022, 29 L.Ed. 2d 564 (1971); Schneckloth v. Bustamonti, 412 U.S. 218, 93 S.Ct. 2014, 36 L.Ed. 2d 854 (1973); Bumper v. North Carolina, 391 U.S. 543, 88 S.Ct.1788, 20 L.Ed. 2d 797 (1968).
	h.	For such other and further reasons as may appear or exist upon hearing of this cause.  
	WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, the Defendant prays that this motion be set down for a hearing prior to trial and that upon hearing, it be in all things granted.
							Respectfully Submitted,

							___________________________________
							Name
							State Bar No. 
							City, State, Zip
							Telephone
							Attorney for Defendant

	CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

	This is to certify that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing Motion To Suppress Evidence was hand delivered to ///, Assistant United States Attorney, /// Street, ///, Texas ///, on the /// day of /// , 20///.

							_____________________________________

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

__________________ DISTRICT OF TEXAS
										
__________________  DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA	                 §
 §
v.	                                                                 §	__________________
     §	
_______________________________               §

ORDER REGARDING MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE

	The Defendant's Motion To Suppress Statements is hereby: 
	GRANTED 
	DENIED to which ruling the Defendant timely noted an exception. 
	SIGNED AND ENTERED this day _____of ____________________ , 20_____.

							______________________________________
							JUDGE PRESIDING