Recent Opinion on a Case out of the Oakland County Circuit Court
In the Oakland County Circuit Court, if you have OWI Third Offense charges, the police officer’s memory of a traffic stop may be more persuasive to the judge than a video recording.

Great Attorneys File Motions to Suppress Regardless of Tough Judges and Conservative Laws
The Michigan Court of Appeals decided today that an officer’s testimony regarding the reason for a traffic stop might be more persuasive than a videotape of the stop. In People v. Brian Vanbibber, COA #297186, the defendant was charged in the Oakland County Circuit Court with OWI Third Offense. The defense filed a Motion to Suppress based upon an allegation that the traffic stop was unconstitutional. The arresting officer testified that the videotape was unclear and that her recollection of the stop was more accurate. The trial court agreed with the officer and denied the Motion to Suppress. Although courts routinely resist granting motions to suppress evidence, dutiful attorneys do what it takes to protect and defend their clients.
The Court of Appeals reviewed the law in Michigan regarding the Fourth Amendment right to be free from unlawful seizure as follows:
In order to effectuate a valid traffic stop, a police officer must have an articulable and reasonable suspicion that a vehicle or one of its occupants is subject to seizure for a violation of law.” People v Williams, 236 Mich App 610, 612; 601 NW2d 138 (1999). A traffic stop is permissible when an officer has probable cause to believe that a traffic violation has occurred or was occurring. People v Davis, 250 Mich App 357, 363-364; 649 NW2d 94 (2002). Therefore, upon “reasonable grounds shown, a police officer may stop and inspect a motor vehicle for an equipment violation.” Williams, 236 Mich App at 612. Additionally, “a police officer who witnesses a civil infraction may stop and temporarily detain the offender for the purpose of issuing a written citation.” People v Chapo, 283 Mich App 360, 366; 770 NW2d 68 (2009). An actual violation of the vehicle code need not be proven. Rather, the officer’s reasonable impression that a violation may have occurred is the dispositive question. People v Fisher, 463 Mich 881, 882; 617 NW2d 37 (2000) (Corrigan, J.) A traffic violation or civil infraction provides sufficient cause to justify the stop of a vehicle. People v Kazmierczak, 461 Mich 411, 420 n 8; 605 NW2d 667 (2000).”
The Court of Appeals Upholds the Circuit Court’s Ruling Suppressing Evidence
In its opinion, the appellate court upheld the trial court and found that it cannot substitute its judgment for the trial court judge’s relative to factual findings. The Michigan Court of Appeals upheld the ruling regarding the Motion to Suppress despite the best efforts of the motion to suppress attorneys advocating for their client. Oakland County prosecutors rely on local judges to “have their backs,” but the Court of Appeals did the right thing.

Can Illegally Seized Evidence Be Used Against Me? How a Motion to Suppress Can Protect You
When police violate your rights during a search or seizure, the Court should not permit the prosecution to use the evidence they illegally collected to convict you. The Constitution protects you from illegal searches and seizures under the Fourth Amendment. If law enforcement crosses that line, a skilled defense attorney can file a motion to suppress and ask the judge to throw out that evidence.
Judges don’t automatically exclude evidence. You have to act quickly and challenge the legality of the search. This challenge is often your best chance to weaken the prosecutor’s case or even have it dismissed.
Examples of evidence a court may suppress:
- Drugs or weapons found during an illegal traffic stop
- Statements made during a custodial interrogation without Miranda warnings
- Cellphone or GPS data obtained without a warrant
- Evidence from a home search without valid consent or a lawful warrant
Prosecutors fight hard to keep evidence in. If the evidence came from a search that broke the law, your attorney must be ready to challenge it with a Motion to Suppress it in court. A well-argued motion to suppress can change everything in a criminal case, especially if the government’s case hinges on that evidence.
How to Get Evidence Thrown Out in Court: What You Need to Know About Motions to Suppress
You don’t have to accept every piece of evidence the prosecutor throws at you. If the police violated your rights when they collected it, you may have the legal right to get it thrown out. That happens through a motion to suppress, which is a powerful legal tool that challenges how the police obtained the evidence.
To win this kind of motion, your criminal defense attorney must file the request early in your case and clearly explain how the police violated your rights. The judge will review the facts and determine whether the evidence should stay in or be excluded from the trial.
Common grounds for a motion to suppress include:
- Illegal traffic stops or arrests
- Unlawful searches of your home, car, or phone
- Warrantless searches without valid exceptions
- Miranda violations during questioning
Judges won’t throw out evidence just because something feels unfair. Your lawyer must show that the police acted illegally or violated court rules. An experienced criminal defense attorney understands how to uncover these problems, present them strategically, and force the issue in court. If the judge agrees, the prosecutor may lose the evidence they need to convict you, and sometimes, that means the case falls apart.

Attorneys Who Win Motions to Suppress Illegally Seized Evidence
At LEWIS & DICKSTEIN, P.L.L.C., we’ve filed and argued motions to suppress evidence for clients on countless occasions. We do our best to find a basis for getting our clients’ cases dismissed and do whatever is necessary to give you the best chance of winning in court or getting charges dismissed.
Call us today at (248) 263-6800 for a free consultation or complete an online Request for Assistance Form. We will contact you promptly and find a way to help you.