State v. Bailey
Annotate this CaseJack Bailey appealed from a judgment of conviction of ten counts of gross sexual assault and two counts of unlawful sexual conduct entered in the superior court, arguing that the court erred in denying his motion to suppress live-witness testimony because the testimony should have been suppressed as fruit of the poisonous tree in violation of the Fourth Amendment. The State contended that the court erred in granting Bailey's motion to suppress evidence discovered during a police search of Bailey's residence. The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment, holding (1) the circuit court correctly found that Bailey's consent to the search of his apartment was not voluntary, and therefore, the evidence found during the search was properly suppressed; and (2) the circuit court did not err in denying the motion to suppress the live-witness testimony after considering the factors set out in United States v. Ceccolini in determining the admissibility of the witnesses' testimony.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.