It sounds like you've got a rather unusual situation. In your attorney's defense, it is always difficult to state with any real certainty what a judge would do with a motion to suppress. There are very few certainties and many shades of grey.
It sounds like his suggestion is that the prosecutor would argue "inevitable discovery", meaning that they would have turned up the evidence anyway. Obviously, I wasn't part of the discussion with your attorney. If he was, in your opinion, indicating that the law enforcement "could have done this correctly, but chose not to", then I would agree with you, this seems like a weak argument. However, if he's arguing, as I suggested, the inevitable discovery, that might be a stronger argument.
Inevitable discovery, as the term implies, means that, even without the unlawful activity, law enforcement would have ultimately obtained the evidence anyway. In your situation, the prosecutor would need to have some viable argument that the officers WOULD have gotten into the car anyway.
Based on your information, this would be my best argument as to why NOT to suppress the evidence.
I hope you found my answer helpful. If so, please click on the green ACCEPT for my answer. This is necessary for me to be paid for my work and so that I can get credit for assisting you. Your question will not close, and you will still have the opportunity to follow-up if needed. Leaving a bonus and positive feedback is not required, but doing so is certainly appreciated! Thank you and good luck!
I'm happy to SPECULATE as to what might happen here, but please keep in mind, that's exactly what it is, speculation. While I can appreciate your concerns about your attorney, he is clearly in a better position than me to address this concern.
As to that, you might want to consider changing attorneys. It sounds like you're very dissatisfied with him, YOU did the research, not him, he has done little for you as to a plea offer and hasn't followed up on the search warrant issue.
Anyway, enough preaching....
To demonstrate inevitable discovery, the prosecutor would call the lead investigator. The investigator would discuss all avenues he had pursued, the evidence he had obtained, etc. Ultimately, the prosecutor would want the investigator to testify that, through his other leads, he would have ultimately located the car and conducted a lawful search of the car.
As to still needing a search warrant, it depends. For instance, they wouldn't need a warrant to see the outside of the car and/or anything in plain sight within the vehicle. Additionally, their observations of these things (the outside of the car and anything in plain sight), might provide an additional basis for a warrant.
What will happen here? Tough to say. I would suggest setting up an office conference with your attorney. Discuss all your issues/concerns with him. After the meeting, make a decision as to whether you stick with him or hire another attorney. Assuming the offer is still the maximum, you've got nothing to lose in pursuing the motion.
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).