The ACLU filed an amicus brief on behalf of Robert Joseph Teresinski, who had conducted an armed robbery of a Dixon, California 7-Eleven in Yolo County, but whose car was stopped by an Officer Rocha at 2 am under the assumption that he was a minor (he was not) and was violating Dixon's 10 pm curfew. Rocha conducted an unauthorized search of the car and found a can of beer, a loaded gun, and stolen bills. He conducted an illegal arrest, took mug shots, and asked the Woodland 7-Eleven clerk (Cady) to identify the robbers. The clerk, shown a photograph of Teresinski, identified him, and later identified him in person in court.

However, due to the illegal nature of the car search and the unlawful arrest, pursuant to Penal Code section 1538.5, the defendant moved "to suppress both the physical evidence seized and the identification testimony of Cady, basing his motion primarily on the testimony of Cady and Officer Rocha at the preliminary hearing." Evidence was suppressed, meaning that there was no admissable evidence to convict Teresinski. However, the court decided that there was no need to suppress Cady's testimony, which "rests upon his independent memory of the robbery."

Therefore, the court writes: "...we hold that the superior court correctly suppressed both the physical evidence seized at the time of the illegal detention and the testimonial evidence that Cady, the robbery victim, identified defendant's photograph the morning after the robbery. The court erred, however, in suppressing Cady's testimony identifying defendant at the preliminary hearing. Since that testimony was sufficient to establish probable cause to believe that defendant committed the charged robbery, the court also erred in dismissing the action against defendant."