23.3 F
Duluth
spot_img

Accused DECC window-peeper seeks suppression of evidence based on unlawful search

Date:

Share:

On March 20, 2025, counsel for alleged DECC window-peeper Perry Burke filed a motion in St. Louis Co...

A subscription is required to access this article. Subscribe or click login below:

━ more like this

City of Proctor failed to disclose $850,000 discount on sports dome land sale

In the summer of 2024, project developer NGP LLC approached the City of Proctor to propose the development of the NXS National Sports Complex....

Contractors place mechanic’s liens on Popeye’s Chicken

On Oct. 22, 2025, local building contractor Kaski Inc. filed a lawsuit against Ayazz Construction Management, Duluth Chicken LLC, The Jigsaw LLC, and National...

City to issue Notice of Breach as Lincoln Park housing project once again fails to pay contractors

A Lincoln Park project is once again failing to pay its contractors. Work was previously halted due to unpaid contractor bills at the development...

Lakewood Township to put zoning change question to voters

Recently, Lakewood Township has been discussing the possibility of eliminating their Planning Department and moving the management of the township’s zoning to St. Louis...

Shiprock Management charged Superior tenant $60/month to cover city’s $10.75/month garbage and recycling fee

The Monitor was recently contacted by an individual named Sarah, who claimed Shiprock Management had overcharged her for her garbage and recycling service when...
spot_img

3 COMMENTS

  1. The warrant was granted to look at the photos on the guy’s phone for evidence proving he is a peeping tom. The additional photos from his other crimes are relevant to that specific warrant, so it should be admissible. Also, by looking for pictures and coming across the others, one could say they were in “plain view” and can be seized as evidence. There is also something called “Inevitable Discovery”. If the photos would have inevitably been discovered through lawful means anyway, they would be admissible. It will be interesting to hear what they decide.

    • Thanks for asking. The case is still winding its way through the courts. The defense has raised an objection to evidence uncovered in the search of Burke’s phone, saying the search warrant was unreasonably broad. The judge has not ruled on that at this point. The next hearing is scheduled for July 25, 2025.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here