Case Review: Firearm Suppression
- Steven Topazio wrote this February 22, 2024 at 3:27 pm
Client Charges:
Carrying a firearm without a license, carrying a loaded firearm, possession of ammunition, possession of class B cocaine, assault and battery on a police officer.
Summary:
Attorney Steven Topazio took on the defense of a client facing multiple serious charges stemming from an arrest by law enforcement. The police alleged that the defendant was loitering in a park late at night while wearing attire that raised suspicion. Upon encountering the defendant, officers claimed to have activated their emergency lights and ordered the defendant to stop, citing trespassing in the park after hours. However, the defendant contested the characterization of the area as a park, leading Attorney Topazio to conduct a thorough investigation. Through this process, it was revealed that the location where the defendant was stopped was actually a city plaza, monitored by surveillance cameras.
Attorney Topazio strategically challenged the legality of the stop and subsequent search, arguing that the police lacked reasonable suspicion to detain the defendant. He filed a motion to suppress evidence, citing the mischaracterization of the location by law enforcement and the lack of justification for the stop.
Following a lengthy court hearing, the judge sided with Attorney Topazio, determining that the defendant was indeed stopped in a plaza and not a park. The judge discredited the officer’s testimony and concluded that the defendant was not trespassing or loitering, but simply walking through a public area. Furthermore, the judge found the pat frisk conducted by police to be unreasonable, leading to the firearm suppression and the suppression of all evidence obtained during the illegal stop as the ‘fruits of the poisonous tree.’ Despite the judge’s decision in favor of the defense, the Commonwealth filed a notice of appeal, signaling their intent to challenge the ruling and continue legal proceedings.
Conclusion:
Attorney Steven Topazio’s meticulous defense strategy resulted in a significant victory for his client, with the court ruling in favor of suppressing crucial evidence. The case highlights the importance of thorough investigation and strategic legal maneuvering in challenging unlawful police actions. As the case moves forward with a potential appeal, all parties involved await further legal developments.