Preview:

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA No. 98-KK-0188 STATE OF LOUISIANA v. ARISTIDE LANDRY AND RAYMOND SCARDINO On Writ of Certiorari to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal PER CURIAM:* Resolving a credibility choice between state and defense witnesses with regard to the circumstances under which both defendants accompanied police officers from their residence to the Homicide Division of the New Orleans Police Department, where they gave videotaped statements at issue here concerning the death of Lester Hansen, the trial court found that the police had arrested the defendants in their home without arrest warrants in violation of Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573, 100 S.Ct. 1371, 63 L.Ed.2d 639 (1980). The court further ruled that "[e]verything

that happened thereafter was fruits of the poisonous tree, and thus should be suppressed." in the trial court's ruling." App. 4th Cir. 12/18/97). The court of appeal found "no error State v. Scardino, 97-2582 (La.

We granted the state's application not

to review the exercise of the trial court's factfinding discretion but to consider its ruling in light of New York v. Harris, 495 U.S. 14, 21, 110 S.Ct. 1640, 1644-45, 109 L.Ed.2d 13 (1990), which held that "where the police have probable cause to arrest a suspect, the exclusionary rule does not bar the State's use of a statement made by the defendant outside of his home, even though the statement is taken after an arrest made in the

*

Kimball, J., not on panel.

See La.S.Ct. Rule IV, Part II,

Download 98-KK-0188 STATE OF LOUISIANA v. RAYMOND SCARDINO AND ARISTIDE LANDRY.pdf

Louisiana Law