Black v. State (Original)
Annotate this CaseDefendant was convicted of possession with intent to deliver methamphetamine in an amount between four and 200 grams. At issue was whether the trial court erred in re-opening the hearing on the motion to suppress shortly after trial commenced to hear additional evidence outside the jury's presence in support of its pretrial denial of defendant's motion. Defendant contended that this procedure violated Rachal v. State. The court concluded that the court of appeals did not err in holding that the trial court's discretion to reopen the evidentiary hearing on defendant's motion to suppress and to entertain Judge Jacobs's testimony. Nor did the court of appeals err in going beyond the face of the warrant and relying on Judge Jacobs's testimony at the reopened motion-to-suppress hearing as sufficient to establish probable cause to issue defendant's arrest warrant, at least for the offense of failure to appear. Because defendant was arrested pursuant to a valid arrest warrant, the trial court did not err in denying defendant's motion to suppress the evidentiary fruit of that arrest. Accordingly, the judgment of the court of appeals affirming the trial court's judgment was affirmed.
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.