Appellate courts exercise unlimited review over whether a party properly preserved an issue for appellate review. State v. Ton, 308 Kan. 564, 570, 422 P.3d 678 (2018).
The State carries the burden to prove that a search and seizure was lawful. State v. Ton , 308 Kan. 564, 568, 422 P.3d 678 (2018).
In particular, Krebbs has never contended that the State's specific counterarguments did not satisfy its burden of proving that the DEU members had probable cause for his warrantless arrest and for the warrantless search of his car. See State v. Ton , 308 Kan. 564, 568, 422 P.3d 678 (2018) (holding that when a defendant moves to suppress evidence as illegally seized, the State carries the burden of proving that a law enforcement officer's warrantless search was lawful). All Complaints About the Trial Court's Inadequate Ruling Waived
The State has the burden to prove that a search and seizure was lawful. State v. Ton , 308 Kan. 564, 568, 422 P.3d 678 (2018). Voluntary Encounter
When faced with a motion to suppress evidence, the State bears the burden to prove that a search and seizure was lawful. State v. Ton , 308 Kan. 564, 568, 422 P.3d 678 (2018).The trial court did not err in finding there was reasonable suspicion for the traffic stop.
And when faced with a motion to suppress evidence, the State bears the burden to prove that a search and seizure was lawful. State v. Ton , 308 Kan. 564, 568, 422 P.3d 678 (2018). Similarly, when the parties do not dispute the material facts of the case, the suppression question becomes solely a question of law that this court reviews de novo.
The State bears the burden to prove that a search and seizure was lawful. State v. Ton, 308 Kan. 564, 568, 422 P.3d 678 (2018). In Gant, the United States Supreme Court delineated the parameters of the search incident to arrest exception.Specifically, the Court held that a vehicle may be searched incident to a recent occupant's arrest only when (1) the arrestee is unsecured and within reaching distance of the passenger compartment at the time of the search or (2) it is "'reasonable to believe'" evidence relevant to the crime of arrest might be found in the vehicle.
The State carries the burden to prove that a search and seizure was lawful. State v. Ton, 308 Kan. 564, 568, 422 P.3d 678 (2018). To the extent resolving this question requires statutory interpretation, that presents a question of law subject to unlimited review.
If a defendant narrows the scope of his or her argument, resulting in a suppression hearing focused on a particular issue and directing the district court to make certain findings and conclusions related only to that issue, an appellate court does not need to address the merits of a broader claim on appeal. See State v. Ton, 308 Kan. 564, 571-72, 422 P.3d 678 (2018). That is the case here.
The State has the burden to prove that a search and seizure was lawful. State v. Ton, 308 Kan. 564, 568, 422 P.3d 678 (2018). There are generally four types of encounters between individuals and police: (1) voluntary or consensual encounters, (2) investigatory detentions, (3) public safety stops, and (4) arrests.