Opinion ID: 785213
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: An Order Suppressing Evidence

Text: 42 The defendants contend that the Territorial Court's redaction order was not an order suppress[ing] evidence within the meaning of 4 V.I.Code § 39(a)(1). But it would be a terribly crabbed reading of the statute to hold that admitting a statement subject to redactions does not amount to a suppression of evidence. The statute finishes its list of appealable orders with a catch-all category—those orders which otherwise den[y] the prosecutor the use of the evidence at trial. Id. Even if the redaction order is not an order suppressing evidence, it surely denies the Government the use of the full confessions at trial. Thus we reject the defendants' contention that the Territorial Court's order was not a proper subject for appeal. 43