Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Supreme Judicial Court weighs suppression after race-based traffic stop in Commonwealth v. Diaz
Summary
At oral argument in SJC-13635, defense counsel urged suppression of drugs seized after what he said was an unlawful, racially motivated stop and brief vehicular flight; the Commonwealth urged the court to affirm the trial court’s denial of suppression and argued intervening conduct attenuated the taint.
The Supreme Judicial Court heard argument in SJC-13635, Commonwealth v. Diaz, over whether evidence of drugs recovered after a traffic stop must be suppressed as the fruit of an unlawful, race-based stop.
John Warren, attorney for the defendant Diaz, told the court that the stop lacked any lawful basis and was motivated by race, arguing that both the Article 14 and equal-protection violations “required suppression of the drugs.” He told the justices the case “is the case to put into action what Chief Justice Gantt said concurring in Long, which is that the prohibition against racial profiling must be given teeth.”
Warren urged the court to apply the three-factor attenuation test and said those factors weigh in favor of suppression here. He emphasized the brevity of the vehicular flight — the defendant drove off and entered the woods 36 seconds after leaving the stop…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
