“Even if this motion is successful, it doesn’t mean that Luigi Mangione walks out of prison,” said Ron Kuby, a criminal defense attorney whose practice focuses on civil rights. “All it means is that the items that were seized from him, or seized that belong to him, can’t be used as evidence against him.”
Kuby thinks that Mangione’s team has made enough claims in their papers to merit a hearing on the issues, in which the police officer involved would have to testify, confirming or denying the facts. “It does appear that they stopped and frisked Mangione without a legal basis to do it. If that’s true, everything that follows from there is likely to be found to be unconstitutional,” he said.
You should read the motion. The motion to suppress isn’t based mistaken identity or identity. The Motion is based around how officers detained/seized the Defendant and items unlawfully. Officers did not give the Defendant the ability to leave (seizure) which means their actions rise to an “investigative detention.” This is a violation of the 4th Amendment and the 14th amendment.
The Officers detained the Defendant to Interrogate him and because he was not free to leave, the should have Mirandized him at that point. The Officers failed to Mirandize the Defendant during a custodial interrogation which is a violation of the 5th Amendment.
While I don’t think it was in the PA Defense filing: at one of the hearings there was questions about the chain of custody of the backpack. This could also lead to suppression of evidence (as I believe the gun wasn’t found until after the police took the bag to the station—but I can’t find the source that mentioned this fact now so I’m not sure if this specific facts is accurate anymore).