Motion to suppress — standing stipulations and preliminary argument — July 5, 1994 (Day 3)

📄 Motion to suppress — standing stipulations and preliminary argument — Tuesday, July 5, 1994

Address:

C:\DEPT103\PRELIMINARY\1994\JUL\5\MOTION-TO-SUPPRESS-STANDING-ST.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 3 of 6

◀ Direct examination of Rachel Ferrara Direct examination of Philip Vannatter on standing ▶

Motion to suppress — standing stipulations and preliminary argument

Date: Tuesday, July 5, 1994 • Lines: 17

The court began the defense motion to suppress by deciding whether O.J. Simpson had the right to challenge searches involving the Hertz Ford Bronco and his Rockingham property. The parties agreed on some foundational facts, but the prosecution reserved its position on the area around Kato Kaelin's guest house, so the judge directed that Detective Philip Vannatter be called first solely to address standing.

# 1 THE COURT:

YOU MAY STEP DOWN. I WOULD ASK YOU NOT TO DISCUSS YOUR TESTIMONY WITH ANYONE BUT THE LAWYERS INVOLVED IN THIS MATTER. YOU MAY BE RECALLED. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. I THINK THAT, THEN, WE HAVE COME TO THAT POINT IN THE PROCEEDINGS WHERE WE ARE GOING TO DEAL WITH THE DEFENSE MOTION TO SUPPRESS CERTAIN ITEMS OF EVIDENCE. WE DID HAVE A CONFERENCE IN CHAMBERS RIGHT BEFORE THE NOON HOUR TO DISCUSS THE TIMING OF THE WITNESSES ON THIS MATTER. AND IT IS BASICALLY ANTICIPATED THAT THERE MAY BE A TOTAL OF SIX OR SEVEN WITNESSES TESTIFYING FOR BOTH SIDES IN CONNECTION WITH THE MOTION ONLY. IS THERE AN ISSUE OF STANDING THAT NEEDS TO BE ESTABLISHED BEFORE WE GET TO THE BASICS OF THIS MOTION, OR HAS THAT BEEN AGREED TO BY THE PARTIES?

# 2 MR. UELMEN:

PERHAPS WE CAN STIPULATE. WE CAN MAKE AN OFFER OF PROOF, YOUR HONOR, THAT THE WITNESSES WHO WILL BE TESTIFYING WILL ESTABLISH THAT THE FORD BRONCO, ALTHOUGH REGISTERED TO THE HERTZ CORPORATION, WAS PERMANENTLY ASSIGNED FOR USE BY THE DEFENDANT, O.J. SIMPSON, AS PART OF HIS EMPLOYMENT BY HERTZ; THAT IT WAS LOCKED AND THAT THE KEYS TO THE BRONCO WERE INSIDE THE HOUSE. AND THERE WILL ALSO BE TESTIMONY THAT THE PREMISES AT 360 ROCKINGHAM ARE THE FAMILY HOME OF THE DEFENDANT, O.J. SIMPSON, SHARED BY HIS HOUSEKEEPER, HIS DAUGHTER AND HIS GUEST, BRIAN KAELIN.

# 3 THE COURT:

MISS CLARK?

# 4 MS. CLARK:

IS COUNSEL ASKING ME TO STIPULATE THAT THERE WILL BE SUCH TESTIMONY, OR THAT THAT IS THE CASE?

# 5 THE COURT:

MR. UELMEN?

# 6 MR. UELMEN:

EITHER WAY IS FINE, BUT I WAS JUST MAKING AN OFFER OF PROOF THAT THE TESTIMONY WOULD ELICIT THESE FACTS. MS CLARK- WITH RESPECT TO THE OFFER CONCERNING THE FORD BRONCO, THE PEOPLE AGREE THAT IS WHAT THE TESTIMONY WILL SHOW WITH RESPECT TO THE PREMISES OF 360 ROCKINGHAM, THERE MAY BE AN ISSUE AS TO THE GUEST HOUSE AREA OF MR. KAELIN. I WOULD LIKE TO REFRAIN FROM ENTERING INTO ANY STIPULATION CONCERNING STANDING AT THIS POINT. I WOULD STIPULATE THAT THE PREMISES OF 360 ROCKINGHAM ARE OWNED BY THE DEFENDANT, BUT RESERVE THE ISSUE OF THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY OF THE AREA AROUND THE GUEST HOUSE UNIT.

# 7 THE COURT:

I THINK IN THE ABUNDANCE OF CAUTION -- I AM NOT SURE I QUITE UNDERSTAND WHAT THE IMPORT IS OF WHAT MISS CLARK IS WILLING TO STIPULATE TO. MAYBE WE CAN JUST ESTABLISH STANDING AT THE OUTSET SO THERE IS NO ISSUE AS TO STANDING AND TO PROCEED AS TO THE REST OF THE MOTION AFTER. ARE YOU PREPARING TO DO THAT AT THIS TIME, MR. UELMEN?

# 8 MR. UELMEN:

I AM NOT SURE OUR WITNESSES ARE HERE TO DO THAT. ALL RIGHT. WE WILL DO IT, THEN, WITH DETECTIVE VANNATTER.

# 9 THE COURT:

OKAY. THEN YOU MAY CALL YOUR WITNESS.

# 10 MR. UELMEN:

YES, WE WILL CALL DETECTIVE PHILLIP VANNATTER.

# 11 MS. CLARK:

EXCUSE ME, YOUR HONOR, MAY I BE HEARD?

# 12 THE COURT:

YES.

# 13 MS. CLARK:

PERHAPS WHAT COUNSEL WOULD LIKE TO DO IS STIPULATE THAT THE ITEMS OF EVIDENCE WE SEEK TO INTRODUCE AT 0016 THIS PRELIMINARY HEARING WERE NOT SEIZED PURSUANT TO WARRANT. I WILL SO STIPULATE. AND THEN THE BURDEN SHIFTS TO THE PEOPLE. THERE IS NO REASON FOR COUNSEL TO CALL DETECTIVE VANNATTER. WE ARE NOT LITIGATING THE WARRANT, YOUR HONOR.

KEY QUOTE

# 14 THE COURT:

I UNDERSTAND. THE COURT IS NOT -- HAS NOT MADE ANY INQUIRY CONCERNING THE WARRANT AT THIS POINT IN TIME. IN READING YOUR RESPONDING PAPERS THAT WERE FILED TODAY, THERE IS AN ISSUE, AS THERE IS WITH ANY 1538.5 MOTION, WITH REGARD TO STANDING, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THAT WAS PUT IN ISSUE BY THE RESPONDING PAPERS THAT YOU FILED, AND -

# 15 MS. CLARK:

WHAT -- I AM SORRY.

# 16 THE COURT:

AND I THINK THE ONLY PURPOSE FOR WHICH MR. UELMEN WAS CALLING DETECTIVE VANNATTER WAS FOR THE STANDING ISSUES ONLY, PERIOD, NOT WITH REGARD TO THE MERITS OF THE MOTION ITSELF, THE LOCATION OF EVIDENCE THAT WAS RECOVERED OR ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE. WE ARE JUST GOING TO DEAL SOLELY AND EXCLUSIVELY INITIALLY WITH THE STANDING ISSUES.

# 17 MS. CLARK:

THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (4)

Gerald Uelmen

THE FORD BRONCO, ALTHOUGH REGISTERED TO THE HERTZ CORPORATION, WAS PERMANENTLY ASSIGNED FOR USE BY THE DEFENDANT, O.J. SIMPSON, AS PART OF HIS EMPLOYMENT BY HERTZ; THAT IT WAS LOCKED AND THAT THE KEYS TO THE BRONCO WERE INSIDE THE HOUSE.

Uelmen stated the facts the defense expected to establish to show Simpson had a privacy interest in the Bronco.

Marcia Clark

I WOULD STIPULATE THAT THE PREMISES OF 360 ROCKINGHAM ARE OWNED BY THE DEFENDANT, BUT RESERVE THE ISSUE OF THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY OF THE AREA AROUND THE GUEST HOUSE UNIT.

Clark accepted Simpson's ownership of Rockingham while preserving a dispute over whether he could challenge a search near Kaelin's guest house.

Marcia Clark

PERHAPS WHAT COUNSEL WOULD LIKE TO DO IS STIPULATE THAT THE ITEMS OF EVIDENCE WE SEEK TO INTRODUCE AT 0016 THIS PRELIMINARY HEARING WERE NOT SEIZED PURSUANT TO WARRANT. I WILL SO STIPULATE.

Clark offered to concede that the challenged evidence was seized without a warrant, arguing that this shifted the burden to the prosecution and made Vannatter unnecessary for that point.

Kathleen Kennedy-Powell

WE ARE JUST GOING TO DEAL SOLELY AND EXCLUSIVELY INITIALLY WITH THE STANDING ISSUES.

The judge sharply limited the first phase of the hearing to whether Simpson had the right to challenge the searches, leaving the merits and locations of recovered evidence for later.

Evidence (3)

Informal

The Ford Bronco assigned by Hertz to O.J. Simpson, allegedly locked with its keys inside the Rockingham house.

discussed in connection with standing and the expected suppression testimony

Informal

Unspecified items of evidence that the prosecution intended to introduce at the preliminary hearing and that were recovered without a warrant.

discussed as the subject of the suppression motion; the prosecution offered to stipulate that the items were seized without a warrant

Informal

The prosecution's responding papers filed that day concerning the defense suppression motion.

discussed by the court as placing standing in issue

Notable Exchanges (2)

Gerald Uelmen•Marcia Clark•Kathleen Kennedy-Powell

Uelmen offered to establish Simpson's privacy interests through expected testimony about the Hertz Bronco and the Rockingham residence; Clark accepted the Bronco facts and ownership of Rockingham but reserved the guest-house-area issue.

strategic

Gerald Uelmen•Marcia Clark•Kathleen Kennedy-Powell

After Uelmen proposed calling Detective Vannatter, Clark argued that a stipulation that the evidence was seized without a warrant would eliminate the need for his testimony. The judge clarified that Vannatter would initially be called only on standing, not the merits of the suppression motion.

procedural

Objections

None recorded

Proceeding 9104 • 17 lines

Preliminary Trial

Department 103