Reference no: EM133391960

Kevin, an attorney, has been indicted for embezzlement. After his preliminary hearing, he filed a motion to sup-press a confession he believes was illegally obtained. A hearing was conducted, and the trial court granted his motion. The evidence was vital to the prosecution. Kevin's attorney has also requested that the trial be continued because he claims that Kevin is not competent to stand trial. The judge ordered a mental evaluation, held a hearing, and found Kevin competent to stand trial.

The defense also requested that the court order a number of police officers to submit to depositions prior to trial. The court denied the motion.

At trial, the defendant objected to the introduction of a document that he believed was unconstitutionally obtained during a search of his office. The judge overruled the objection and admitted the confession into evidence.

1. The prosecution strongly believes that the documents that were suppressed are admissible. The prosecutor objects on the record to the judge's order and then appeals the issue after Kevin is acquitted. What should be the outcome on appeal?

2. Kevin disagrees with the trial court finding of competency. What is his remedy?

3. Believing that Kevin cannot have a fair trial without the depositions, his attorney filed an interlocutory appeal seeking an order from the appellate court requiring the trial judge to provide for the depositions. What should be the outcome?

4. Kevin appealed the trial court's decision denying his motion to suppress the document. The appellate court affirmed the trial court, and Kevin filed a habeas corpus petition in federal court, claiming that his federal constitutional rights were violated by admission of the evidence. What should be the outcome?