STANDARD OF REVIEW
The Fourth Amendment protects the right of citizens from unreasonable search and seizures. (People v. Williams (1999) 20 Cal.4th 125.) A defendant may move to suppress as evidence any tangible or intangible thing obtained as a result of an unreasonable search and seizure without a warrant. (Penal Code §1538.5(a)(1)(A).) As such, the prosecution has the burden of justifying a warrantless search and seizure. (Williams, supra, 20 Cal.4th at 119; see also Wilder v. Superior Court (1979) 92 Cal.App.3d 90.) Nonetheless, if the prosecution fails to meet its burden, the defendant need do nothing more to be entitled to suppression of the primary evidence. (Williams, supra, 20 Cal.4th at 130.) Accordingly, evidence obtained as a result of an unlawful search and seizure is the fruit of the poisonous tree and must be …show more content…
(People v. Souza (1994) 9 Cal.4th 224.) Nonetheless, an investigatory stop based on mere curiosity, rumor or hunch is an unlawful seizure, even though the officer may be acting in good faith. (People v. Clair (1992) 2 Cal.4th 629; see also People v. Hester (2004) 119 Cal.App.4th 373 (holding an officer's hunches and speculations insufficient to render a person engaged in criminal activity).) Moreover, mere proximity to the crime does not establish reasonable suspicion because proximity cannot distinguish between innocent bystanders and criminal actors involved. (United States v. Manzo-Jurado (2006) 457 F.3d 928.) As such, the validity of a detention is to be based on the information known to the officer at the time he acted. (United States v. Gaines (2012) 688 F.3d 170.) Accordingly, a temporary detention is unlawful without sufficient reasonable