Standard of Review Motion to Suppress Evidence In Idaho
Standard on Review from the District Court Acting In Its Appellate Capacity:
When this Court reviews an intermediate appellate decision of the district court, we examine the record that was before the magistrate.
We will review the district court's decision and order for any useful insights; however our focus is on the magistrate's decision and the record upon which it was based. State v. Doe, 130 Idaho 811, 814, 948 P.2d 166, 169 (Ct. App. 1997); State v. Carr, 128 Idaho 181, 183, 911 P.2d 774, 776 (Ct. App. 1995); State v. Hardman, 120 Idaho 667, 668, 818 P.2d 782, 783 (Ct. App. 1991).
Standard of Review from An Order on a Motion to Suppress:
Ordinarily, in reviewing a ruling on a motion to suppress, we employ a bifurcated standard. State v. Abeyta, 131 Idaho 704, 708, 963 P.2d 387, 391 (Ct. App. 1998).
We accept the trial court's findings of fact that are supported by substantial evidence and "freely review the application of constitutional principles to the facts as found." Id.
Here, neither party disputes the facts presented at the hearing on the motion to suppress.
Thus, we exercise free review in determining whether the police encounter was one permitted under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 17 of the Idaho Constitution. See State v. Pick, 124 Idaho 601, 604, 861 P.2d 1266, 1269 (Ct. App. 1993).