49.5 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

Commissioner Musolf’s stalker has history of erratic behavior

On May 6, 2026, a union business manager working on a project in Sioux City, Iowa, called the St. Louis County Sheriff’s Office to...

Tallas Bay to be dredged again

Located below Spirit Mountain on the St. Louis River, Tallas Bay is a long, narrow corridor of water which separates the river shoreline from...

Gnesen Township supervisor damages broadband line while digging trench to save township money

Gnesen Township, 13 miles north of Duluth, had been contemplating the installation of lighting for the town hall flagpole for some time. When Township...

Superior landfill gas-to-data project terminated over a year ago

In November of 2023, the City of Superior entered into a contract with Vespene Energy, a California company interested in constructing a small data...

How the data center guided the new Hermantown Comprehensive Plan

The most important document underlying Google’s proposed data center in Adolph is the City of Hermantown’s 2045 Comprehensive Plan. The city would not have...
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