Legal Opinion
State v. Goldberg
Supreme Court of Vermont
Decided March 25, 2005No. 03-550 and 03-573PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtAllen, C.J.
¶ 1. (Ret.), Specially Assigned. Defendants Tad Goldberg and William Anderson were convicted separately of cultivating and possessing marijuana in violation of 18 V.S.A. § 4230(a)(2), (4) after a police search uncovered a growing operation in their home. They now take this consolidated appeal, contending: (1) that the district court erred in admitting evidence seized during the search because the authorizing warrant issued without probable cause; and (2) that the district court erred in failing to conduct a hearing on the warrant’s merits pursuant to Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (1978).…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Illinois v. GatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Franks v. DelawareSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Aguilar v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Spinelli v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- State v. MorrisSupreme Court of Vermont · 1996
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- State of Tennessee v. Jerry Lewis TuttleTennessee Supreme Court · 2017
- State v. SennaSupreme Court of Vermont · 2013
- State v. ArringtonSupreme Court of Vermont · 2010
- May v. Atlantic City HiltonDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2000
- State v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Vermont · 2009
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.