Does the defendant have the burden to prove the violation was the 'but for' cause of the subsequent discovery of contraband or is it the prosecution's burden to prove the admissibility of evidence discovered after illegal police activity?

QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW Once a Fourth Amendment violation is established, does the defendant have the burden to prove the violation was the “but for” cause of the subsequent discovery of contraband or is it the prosecution’s burden to prove the admissibility of evidence discovered after illegal police activity? There is a circuit split on this issue, which this Court should resolve to prevent unfair suppression outcomes that turn on the location where they arise. i SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OCTOBER TERM 2020 GUILLERMO MARTINEZ-TORRES, Petitioner, vs. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT Petitioner Guillermo Martinez-Torres respectfully requests a writ of certiorari to review the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirming the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress.