Ct.Crim.App. requires trial ct. issue Facts & Conclusions if loser requests. Cullen 195 SW3d 696; Aguirre 402 SW3d 664. If suppression motion is denied, is there a downside to requesting Statement that trial ct. finds State's witnesses credible, reasonable suspicion, and probable cause?

I would say there is a downside. Since the Court denied the motion, it is implicit that they found the State's witnesses credible and found reasonable suspicion/probable cause. There is no need for the Court to spell it out specifically in a document and doing so can actually be detrimental to you during appellate review.

Wwithout FF&CL the appellate court will resolve almost anything they can with the implicit finding that the trial court resolved the issue in favor of the winning side (in this case, the State). To the contrary, if the trial court issues FF&CL, the appellate court will restrict their review solely to the exact grounds, legal theories, and findings made by the trial court in its FF&CL.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: ekquisenberry,

Every time I try a motion to suppress, I prepare draft findings of facts and conclusions of law before the hearing. It is a good check list to use at the hearing. If the defends asks for findings after the hearing, it is ready to present to the court as proposed findings and conclusions and is usually adopted by the court on the spot. That way I am confident the findings cover all the issues and do not have to rely on the courts memory months after the hearing. Typically I do not present the draft unless/until the defense request them.

Eric and John, Thanks for the great advice.