What is the standard of review on a motion to suppress evidence?

The standard of review on a motion to suppress evidence in Virginia appellate law is known as “de novo review.” This type of review means that a court of appeals will review the facts of the case for itself, instead of relying on the trial court’s findings of fact. The appellate court may accept or reject the trial court’s findings, but its determination will be made as if it is the first court to hear the evidence. In Virginia, when a motion to suppress evidence is made, it is up to the trial court to decide whether it should be granted or not. The appellate court then reviews the trial court’s decision de novo. If it finds that the trial court’s decision was incorrect it can reverse the decision and order the motion to be granted. It is important to note, however, that the de novo standard of review does not necessarily mean that the appellate court will always reverse the trial court’s decision. The appellate court may consider the evidence for itself, come to the same conclusion as the trial court, and affirm its ruling. Therefore, it is important to present as many facts to the trial court so that the appellate court has the full picture when it reviews the motion.

Related FAQs

What legal remedies are available in an appeal?
What are the consequences of an appellate court’s decision?
What is the process for filing an appellate brief?
What is the process for obtaining an appellate court’s review of a jury verdict?
Are parties able to appeal an appellate court’s decision to a higher court?
How do I protect my rights if I do not have an attorney during an appeal?
What remedies are available for a party who loses an appeal?
Can a party appeal a judge’s decision directly to the state's Supreme Court?
What is the appellate court’s jurisdiction over a case?
What is the standard of review on a trial court’s decision to admit or exclude evidence?

What is the standard of review on a motion to suppress evidence?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts