COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

MIDDLESEX, SS. SUPERIOR COURT DEPARTMENT

2006-387

COMMONWEALTH

V.

NEIL ENTWISTLE

MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE

Defendant Neil Entwistle, by his attorneys, moves, pursuant to Mass.R.Crim.P.13, to suppress all evidence seized and/or obtained as a result of the warrantless searches of his residence located at 6 Cubs Way, Hopkinton, Massachusetts, on January 21, 2006 and January 22, 2006.

Mr. Entwistle further moves to suppress as evidence any and all items which may lawfully be deemed “fruits of the poisonous tree” including but not limited to the items set forth below. See e.g. Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 (1963).

1. any and all evidence seized as a result of the execution of search warrants on the following dates” January 23, 2006; January 25, 2006; January 27, 2006; January 31, 2006; February 8, 2006; March 14, 2006; March 23, 2006; May 1 or 11, 2006; August 21, 2006.

2. any and all evidence seized by United Kingdom law enforcement agencies;

3. any and all evidence seized by United States federal law enforcement agencies;

4. any and all evidence seized from his automobile;

5. any and all evidence seized from his computers;

6. any and all evidence seized from a search of his financial documents;

7. any and all evidence seized from his Palm Pilot;

8. any and all evidence seized from his “jump Drives”;

9. any statements allegedly made by Mr. Entwistle.

In further support of this request Mr. Entwistle states that:

1. The searches conducted on January 21, 2006 and January 22, 2006 were made without a warrant and without probable cause in violation of rights guaranteed him by the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the the United States Constitution;

2. The searches conducted on January 21, 2006 and January 22, 2006 were made without a warrant and without probable cause in violation of rights guaranteed him by Articles 12 and 14 of the Declaration of Rights to the Massachusetts Constitution;

3. The searches conducted on January 21, 2006 and January 22, 2006 were made
   without a warrant and without probable cause in violation of M.G.L. c.276, §1;

4. Any items seized and statements allegedly made at any time are fruits of the unlawful searches;

5. The searches conducted on January 21, 2006 and January 22, 2006 were not incident to a lawful arrest;

6. The searches conducted on January 21, 2006 and January 22,2006 were not conducted pursuant to Mr. Entwistle's consent;

7. The searches conducted on January 21, 2006 and January 22, 2006 cannot be justified by any exigent circumstances;

8. There are no other constitutional or legal grounds to justify the warrantless searches conducted on January 21, 2006 and January 22, 2006.

For all the above reasons Mr. Entwistle requests that the court suppress any and all evidence seized and/or obtained on and after January 21, 2006.

NEIL ENTWISTLE

By his attorneys,