Opinion ID: 739906
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Trzaska's Pretrial Motions to Suppress Evidence

Text: 9 Before trial, Trzaska made a motion to suppress the evidence seized during the warrantless plain view search of his apartment. The district court held that the plain view search was unconstitutional because it was conducted without a warrant, and therefore granted Trzaska's motion to suppress the evidence seized in that search, which was interpreted to include his statement about addiction to guns. United States v. Trzaska, 866 F.Supp. 98, 101-05 (E.D.N.Y.1994). This ruling was not appealed and is not questioned on this appeal. Thus we proceed on the assumption that the plain view search and seizure was illegal. 10 Trzaska also moved to suppress the evidence seized during the execution of the search warrants, arguing that the evidence seized pursuant to the warrants was fruit of the illegal plain view search. The district court held that there was probable cause to issue the search warrants even absent the illegal plain view search, and denied this motion to suppress. Id. at 105-06.