State ex rel. Dunn v. Connelly

Syllabus

The defendant C appealed from the judgment of the trial court vesting in the plaintiff ownership of certain animals the court found to be neglected after they were seized subsequent to a warrantless search of C's property, where she operated an animal rescue. C claimed, inter alia, that the court improperly denied her motion in limine, which sought to exclude all evidence seized following the search on the basis of its determination that the exclu- sionary rule did not apply to animal welfare proceedings brought pursuant to statute (§ 22-329a). Held: This court concluded, under the balancing test set forth in United States v. Janis (428 U.S. 433), that the trial court's ruling denying C's motion in limine was legally and logically correct, that court having correctly deter- mined that the exclusionary rule was inapplicable in civil proceedings, as the minimal deterrent effect of employing the rule in the circumstances at issue was substantially outweighed by the societal interest in presenting reliable evidence of animal neglect in actions under § 22-329a to protect the health and safety of animals. C waived her claim that she was entitled to a jury trial under article first, § 19, of the state constitution, as she never requested a jury trial and made no objection prior to the start of the proceedings, in which she actively participated. Argued May 23—officially released October 8, 2024