10.2 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 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...

Bones found in Chisholm basement “determined to not be of human origin”

On Dec. 2, 2025, Chisholm police were contacted by the new homeowner of the house located at 304 2nd St. NW. She reported that...

Incline Village project managers enter federal lawsuit with $1.1 million claim

The development of the Incline Village project ceased almost as soon as construction began, in June of 2025. Blinded by promises of a “transformational”...
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