Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Criminal Procedure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Judge continues suppression hearing after remote‑witness problems in DUI case
Summary
A suppression hearing in State v. Marco Antonio Sura (DUI) was continued after remote‑witness connectivity and interpreter coordination problems; Sergeant Ryan Jackson gave testimony drawn from his police report but audio/video issues led the court to re‑notice the hearing.
The court continued a motion to suppress in the case of Marco Antonio Sura (2022 CR03487) on May 11, 2026, after technical and witness‑availability problems interrupted testimony.
The state called Sergeant Ryan Jackson of the Clayton County Police Department to describe a traffic stop from Aug. 5, 2020. Sergeant Jackson testified that the driver exhibited signs consistent with impairment — odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, slurred speech — and that he administered standardized field sobriety testing, reporting six of six HGN clues, four of eight clues on walk‑and‑turn, and four of four clues on the one‑leg‑stand. "Based on the totality of circumstances...I believe that the defendant was impaired by alcohol," Sergeant Jackson testified after refreshing his report.
Defense counsel questioned Jackson about his independent recollection, and Jackson acknowledged he was relying on the contemporaneous police report for most details: "No, sir. I don't recall," he said when asked for independent recollection beyond the report. Remote audio/video delays and difficulty connecting a second state witness (Officer Christian) caused further interruption. The court and counsel discussed convening an in‑person session or re‑setting the hearing to ensure reliable testimony and interpreter availability.
Judge Long Hayward ordered the suppression hearing continued and asked the parties to coordinate a new date (the court suggested the next motions calendar or an earlier Tuesday if possible). The case will be re‑noticed and the prosecutor and defense will arrange a date allowing the necessary in‑court or reliable remote testimony.
