When the state fails to carry its burden of proof in a motion to suppress hearing, is the remedy suppression of the evidence or can the state have a second chance to carry its burden?

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED 1). During a hearing:ion:.a Motion to Suppress Evidence, when the State fails to carry it's burden of proof, is the remedy suppression of the evidence?/ Or, can the State simply be allowed to have another hearing and a second bite of the apple, i.e., try to carry the burden of proof that it failed to carry the first time? 2). If the State is allowed to have a second chance to carry it's burden of proof, as to the admissibility of evidence, then the Fourth Amendments protections are meaningless, because the state would ALWAYS simply win in a suppression a hearing because they would have many, many chances to cure any defects. 3). When, on Appeal of a Motion to Suppress evidence, the Court finds the State did not carry it's burden of proof, is not the remedy Suppression of the evidence? 4). Has the State of Idaho failed to follow the Fourth Amendment to the United states Constitution? 5). When a State commits a criminal Defendant as incompetent, can statements made by that person be used against him in that proceeding? (Court ordered the Defendant as not competent to understand the proceedings, and unable to assist in his defense, yet used his statements against that was made when he was deemed to be incompetent). 6). Did the United States District Court err when it refused to grant a Certificate of Appealability? 7). Did the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals err when it refused to grant a Certificate of Appealability? 8). When a Criminal Defendant provides evidence of self defense, is he entitled to a hearing in which the State must prove he did not act in self defense? (Burden Shifting if not granted such a hearing). 9). Are the statements of an incompetent person, (One who has been committed to a mental institution), admissible ina criminal proceeding? A