State v. Senecal

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that factual disputes regarding circumstances of traffic stop were pertinent to deciding legal issues in motion to suppress, and thus hearing was necessary
• stating that, because pretrial rulings are necessarily “tentative and subject to revision,” new facts and circumstances that arise at trial require that defendant apprise the court of any new claim or objection
• failure to object to admission of evidence at trial which defendant had sought to suppress in pretrial motion before another judge was waiver of objection
• failure to object to admission of evidence at trial which defendant had sought to suppress in pretrial motion before another judge was waiver of objection
• pretrial rulings on motions to reconsider and motions to suppress are tentative and subject to revision
• pretrial suppression ruling not binding on trial judge where new evidence presented at trial

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).