Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Evidence Bodycam topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Court hears request to reset motion to suppress amid missing body‑cam footage
Summary
Judge Stephanie Boyd presided over a pretrial conference where attorneys asked for a 30‑day continuance so special agents could be coordinated to testify on a motion to suppress related to body‑worn camera footage.
Judge Stephanie Boyd presided over a pretrial discussion in which defense and state counsel addressed the availability of body‑worn camera footage and requested additional time to coordinate testimony.
Counsel told the court that one Department of Public Safety special agent who is relevant to a pending motion to suppress is hospitalized and another is retired. A state attorney said, “He said that he would agree to a continuance, so we prepare that for the court's consideration. We were just asking for a 30‑day reset.” The court did not immediately rule on the request and directed counsel to confer about dates and provide proposed orders for the court’s consideration.
The parties also disputed the existence and completeness of video evidence. Counsel reported that some officers had body cameras but did not activate them because DPS lacked a formal activation policy at the time in question. The court said it wanted all officers who were present that day asked whether any footage exists and ordered the parties to make available any video they have. The judge also said a special agent who is recovering from surgery had offered to testify by Zoom if necessary and asked counsel to confirm whether that would be an acceptable option.
The court instructed counsel to coordinate with the court coordinator to set a jury‑trial date and any necessary pretrial hearing. The transcript shows the court asked Miss Ferguson to offer trial dates and left scheduling and any continuance ruling to subsequent filings.
Background: The discussion centered on a motion to suppress tied to alleged officer actions and the presence or absence of body‑worn camera recordings. Counsel framed the continuance as necessary to allow coordination with special agents whose testimony both sides consider relevant to the motion.
Next steps: Parties were ordered to identify and exchange any video evidence they possess and to notify the court whether witnesses can appear remotely; if a party believes a promised recording exists but has not been produced, the court said it would hold a pretrial hearing to resolve the issue.
