State v. Soto

Jim Ruiz

State of New Jersey v. Pedro Soto (1996) was an important case argued in the New Jersey courts that dealt with the suppression of evidence gathered in violation of the equal protection and due process clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. The court found in favor of the defendants, holding that they had presented a prima facie case of selective enforcement by the New Jersey State Police. Attorneys for the State of New Jersey were unable to refute the case brought against it. The Soto case concerned combined motions to suppress evidence that the defense claimed had been obtained as a result of selective enforcement of traffic laws by New Jersey State Troopers. Seventeen African American defendants asserted that their arrests on drug charges, which had occurred on the New Jersey Turnpike between 1988 and 1991, were the results of biased enforcement of the traffic laws by the New Jersey Criminal ...

Users without subscription are not able to see the full content on this title. Please, subscribe or login to access all content on this website.