California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Barton, 146 Cal.Rptr. 727, 21 Cal.3d 513, 579 P.2d 1043 (Cal. 1978):
7 People v. Siegenthaler (1972) 7 Cal.3d 465, 103 Cal.Rptr. 243, 499 P.2d 499 is not inconsistent with this result. In that case, the defendant moved in the trial court to set aside the information (Pen.Code, 995). He argued at the motion that he should not have been held to answer at his preliminary hearing, because the evidence introduced against him at that hearing was the product of an illegal search and seizure. The trial court denied the section 995 motion. Defendant thereafter moved to suppress that same evidence for the same reasons at a de novo hearing in the superior court (Pen.Code, 1538.5). The court denied this motion also.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.