Rule 16.2 - Motions to Suppress Evidence(a) Objection to the use of any evidence, on the grounds that it was illegally obtained, shall be made by a motion to suppress evidence. The phrase "objection to the use of any evidence, on the grounds that it was illegally obtained," shall include but is not limited to evidence which:1. Consists of tangible property obtained by means of an unlawful search and seizure; or2. Consists of a record of potential testimony reciting or describing declarations or conversations overheard or recorded by means of eavesdropping; or3. Consists of a record or potential testimony reciting or describing a confession or admission of a defendant involuntarily made; or4. Was obtained as a result of other evidence obtained in a manner described in subdivisions one, two, and three; or5. Consists of the prospective in-court identification of the defendant based on an unlawful pre-trial confrontation. The motion shall be made to the court which is to conduct the trial at which such evidence may be offered in evidence.
(b) The motion to suppress shall be timely filed but not later than ten (10) days before the date set for the trial of the case, except that the court for good cause shown may entertain a motion to suppress at a later time.(c) Renewal of a motion to suppress which has been denied may be allowed on the ground of newly discovered evidence or as the interests of justice require.(d) An order granting a motion to suppress prior to trial shall be reviewable on appeal pursuant to Rule of Appellate Procedure-Criminal 3.(e) Determination. A motion to suppress evidence shall be granted only if the court finds that the violation upon which it is based was substantial, or if otherwise required by the Constitution of the United States or of this state. In determining whether a violation is substantial the court shall consider all the circumstances, including: (i) the importance of the particular interest violated;(ii) the extent of deviation from lawful conduct;(iii) the extent to which the violation was willful;(iv) the extent to which privacy was invaded;(v) the extent to which exclusion will tend to prevent violations of these rules;(vi) whether, but for the violation, such evidence would have been discovered; and(vii) the extent to which the violation prejudiced moving party's ability to support his motion, or to defend himself in the proceedings in which such evidence is sought to be offered in evidence against him.