Defininition and Explaination – Motion in Limine
Overview
Although both a motion in limine and a motion to suppress deal with evidence, they serve very different purposes in Michigan criminal cases. Understanding the distinction is critical because each motion affects the trial in its own way and relies on different legal standards. Komorn Law regularly litigates both types of motions to protect clients’ constitutional rights and prevent improper evidence from reaching the jury.
What Is a Motion to Suppress?
A motion to suppress asks the court to exclude evidence because it was obtained in violation of a defendant’s constitutional rights. These motions typically involve:
- Fourth Amendment illegal searches or seizures
- Fifth Amendment violations (e.g., Miranda issues)
- Sixth Amendment right‑to‑counsel violations
- Unlawful traffic stops
- Invalid warrants
- Coerced statements If the court grants a motion to suppress, the evidence is completely barred from trial because it was unlawfully obtained. See Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961) (exclusionary rule).
What Is a Motion in Limine?
A motion in limine is a pretrial request asking the judge to decide whether certain evidence should be excluded or allowed before the jury hears it. Unlike a motion to suppress, it does not depend on constitutional violations. Instead, it focuses on the Michigan Rules of Evidence, such as:
-
MRE 401–403 (relevance and prejudice)
-
MRE 404(b) (other‑acts evidence)
-
MRE 702 (expert testimony) A motion in limine is about trial fairness, not police misconduct.
Key Differences Between the Two Motions
Although both motions can keep evidence out of trial, they differ in purpose, timing, and legal basis:
| Issue | Motion to Suppress | Motion in Limine |
|---|---|---|
| Legal Basis | Constitutional violations | Michigan Rules of Evidence |
| Focus | Police conduct | Jury fairness & evidentiary rules |
| Timing | Usually early in the case | Typically right before trial |
| Effect | Evidence excluded entirely | Evidence excluded or limited at trial |
| Examples | Illegal search, Miranda violation | Prior bad acts, hearsay, prejudicial statements |
A motion to suppress challenges how evidence was obtained. A motion in limine challenges whether the jury should hear it.
Why Both Motions Matter in Criminal Defense
Strategic use of both motions can dramatically change the outcome of a case. A successful motion to suppress may eliminate key evidence, forcing the prosecution to reduce or dismiss charges. A motion in limine can prevent the jury from hearing damaging, irrelevant, or inflammatory information. Together, they help ensure a fair trial and protect constitutional rights.
Since 1993, Komorn Law, PLLC has aggressively defended clients in Michigan courts, litigating motions to suppress, motions in limine, and complex constitutional issues. If you are facing criminal charges or need strategic pretrial advocacy, contact us at 248‑357‑2550 or visit > KomornLaw.com
FAQs
Q: Can a motion in limine exclude evidence that was illegally obtained?
A: No. That requires a motion to suppress based on constitutional grounds.
Q: Can both motions be filed in the same case?
A: Yes. Many cases involve both constitutional issues and evidentiary concerns.
Q: When is a motion to suppress usually filed?
A: Early in the case, often before the preliminary exam or shortly after discovery.
Q: Does a motion in limine apply only to the prosecution’s evidence?
A: No. Either side may file one to control what the jury hears.
Q: What happens if the prosecutor violates a granted motion in limine?
A: The judge may issue sanctions, strike testimony, or declare a mistrial.
More
Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Cases – Election Interference
Case Summary In People v Burkman, defendants created a robocall targeting African American voters during the 2020 election. The call falsely warned that mail‑in voting would expose voters to law‑enforcement tracking, debt collection, and forced vaccinations....
Michigan Cannabis Tax Fraud Cases Are Rising
Hands up CaponeMichigan’s regulated cannabis industry is in a very different place than it was when medical marijuana and adult-use legalization were the primary battlegrounds. As prices compress, margins disappear, and tax burdens increase, enforcement doesn’t...
Deadlocked Jury – What does it mean?
A deadlocked jury is often called a hung jury—A deadlocked jury—often called a hung jury—occurs when jurors cannot reach the unanimous (or legally required) agreement needed to deliver a verdict. In criminal cases, most jurisdictions require unanimity. When the jury...
Social Security Scams – What to Know
The Social Security Administration (SSA) and the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) have issued several warnings about ongoing Social Security scams and continue to advise caution to the public. Here are some of the popular Social Security scams to watch out for in...
Court to Allow Challenge to Michigan’s New 24% Cannabis Tax
Summary A Michigan Court of Claims judge has ruled that the lawsuit challenging the state’s newly enacted 24% wholesale marijuana excise tax may proceed. The ruling, issued January 5, 2026, keeps alive a significant constitutional challenge brought by industry groups...
Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Cases – Arrest
People v Lyons, No 370840, ___ Mich App ___, ___ NW3d ___ (May 13, 2025)Case Summary In People v Lyons, the defendant was a passenger in a vehicle stopped by police. Before the vehicle fully stopped, he exited and began walking away. Officers ordered him to return, he...
Michigan Drivers Face Higher Gas Tax in 2026
Keep Pushing.Summary Michigan’s fuel‑tax structure will undergo a major statutory shift on January 1, 2026, raising the state gas tax from 31 cents to approximately 52.4 cents per gallon. The change eliminates the 6% sales tax on fuel and replaces it with a higher,...
Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Cases – Manslaughter
Case Summary These two cases examine the boundaries of involuntary manslaughter. In People v Aiyash, a gas‑station clerk locked an agitated customer and three patrons inside the store, after which the customer shot the patrons. In People v Sherrill, the defendant...
Michigan begins 2026 with New Laws
Michigan’s 2026 legal landscape includes major tax reforms—most notably the gas‑tax increase from 31¢ to 52.4¢ per gallon—along with cannabis tax changes, wage increases, consumer protections, and transparency laws.Michigan begins 2026 with a slate of new laws...
Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Cases – Appeal
Michigan appellate courts issued several significant decisions refining how convictions are reviewed, when relief from judgment is appropriate, and how procedural errors must be preserved. These cases collectively clarify retroactivity, evidentiary‑weight standards,...
