Judge denies motion to quash evidence in Chen murder case

Jason Chen walking into court, charged with the killing of Jasmine Pace (left) in November 2022.

CHATTANOOGA, Tenn. (WDEF)- The man charged with the murder of 22 year old Jasmine Pace in November 2022 was back in court Monday morning.

The last time Jason Chen was in court, his defense attorney, Joshua Weiss, was attempting to argue that searches by Chattanooga Police and the Pace Family were unconstitutional and should render most of the evidence inadmissible in a trial.

However, Hamilton County Judge Boyd Patterson has ruled against his motion, but things are still unclear on how they will proceed forward.

Weiss told Judge Patterson, “We’re still arguing over parts of the motion to suppress. This matter isn’t ready to be tried next month.”

Weiss says that he has more pre-trial motions he wants Judge Patterson to hear in the wake of the judge’s decision to not suppress evidence.

The attorney had argued that a series of six searches in the two months after Jasmine Pace was killed had violated Jason Chen’s Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable search and seizures.

However, Judge Patterson in an 11 page ruling, says at no time in his legal opinion, did the Pace Family become a state actor, as the judge said their personal motivations to find their daughter were independent of any advice given by police.

Additionally, Judge Patterson wrote that the first entry by three Chattanooga police officers without a warrant is protected under Tennessee’s “Protective Sweeps” law, essentially allowing police to conduct a search when there is a reasonable fear for their safety.

With this ruling, any of this evidence found within these searches can be used at trial.

However, Hamilton County District Attorney Coty Wamp says that she is proceeding with the assumption this case will end up in front of an appellate court.

“Based on our trial strategy and how we are preparing thus far, we do not intend to use any evidence that was gained from the search that the patrol officers performed on Mr. Chen’s apartment. That would include their testimony, and any bodycam footage gathered from that search. We believe that is important for appellate purposes, for the Court of Appeals to know that,” she said.

 The defense may still proceed forward using it despite their belief it was illegally obtained.

Weiss said, “It’s clear as day what the bodycam footage looks like and what the scene looks like, and it’s relevant to this matter.”

District Attorney Wamp argues that could damage their appeal chances.

“I believe that at some point the state would also argue that if Mr. Weiss uses anything from that search into his case then the defendant would not be able to argue on appeal that it was improperly used and should’ve been suppressed,” she said.

This trial was initially scheduled for next month, however it has been pushed back to January 2025. In its place, a new hearing on motions will take place instead in September.