City of Fargo v. Wonder
v.
Nancy Michelle Wonder, Defendant and Appellee
Judge Norman J. Backes
| Appellant: | Stephen R. Dawson , City Prosecutor | |
| Appellee: | Serkland Law Firm |
Listen to recording of oral argument
using RealPlayer Basic,© a free download.
I. The pre trial order to suppress evidence and to exclude evidence is appealable by the city of fargo pursuant to n.d.c.c. 29-28-07 (5).
II.The trial court erred in suppressing the defendant's statement concerning the defendant's age.
a.Statements sought to be suppressed were statements appellee may have made in response to questions concerning consumption of alcohol. No evidence was presented concerning statements made by appellee concerning her age and this question was not before the court.
b.Appellee's statement to police officers concerning her age were related to the booking process and not subject to miranda.
III.The trial court erred in suppressing the results of the SD-2 breath testing device.
a. The trial court erred when it ruled results of the SD-2 were inadmissible based upon constitutional grounds as that question was not before the court and no notice was given to the city concerning that issue.
Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
1. Standard of review when a Trial Court grants a suppression motion.
2. Only a Pretrial Order to suppress evidence and to exclude evidence is appealable by the plaintiff pursuant to N.D.C.C. 29-28-07(5).
3. The Trial Court correctly suppressed the defendant's admission that she was under the age of 21. The Defendant was in custody and being interrogated by law enforcement and had not been given Miranda warnings.
a) Appellee requested that the Court suppress all evidence which was obtained through a custodial interrogation without Miranda warnings. This included statements and evidence obtained by law enforcement relating to the elements of the crime.
b) Appellee was questioned by law enforcement in the apartment relating to her age. This line of questioning was for the purpose of determining her involvement in the commission of a crime and not related to the booking process.
4. The Trial Court as a matter of law, correctly suppressed the results of the SD-2 breath testing device.
a) The Trial Court correctly suppressed the results of the SD-2, as Nancy Wonder raised the issue in her suppression motion and all parties presented evidence and testimony at the Trial Court on this issue and no objections were made by the City to preserve the argument that no notice was given to the City.
b) The Trial Court did not exclude the results of the breath test because of a statutory violation. The Court excluded the results of the breath test as a violation of the Fourth Amendment Search and Seizure laws. Also, the Appellant has included documentation in the Appendix which was not part of the Trial Court record.
Add Docket 20010263 RSS