Legal Opinion

State v. Romero

Utah Supreme Court

Decided February 17, 1983No. 16963PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OAKS, Justice:

A jury convicted defendant of two counts of forgery and two counts of recording a false or forged instrument. U.C.A., 1953, §§ 76-6-501, 76-8-414. On appeal, he claims error in the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress documentary evidence because: (1) the search and seizures were unreasonable; (2) probable cause was lacking; (3) an affidavit was not returned in a timely manner; (4) the magistrate was not “neutral and detached”; (5) police examined some of the documents before the warrant was issued; and (6) the affiant’s deposition was not in writing and subscribed.

O…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Coolidge v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  2. Aguilar v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
  3. Spinelli v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  4. United States v. VentrescaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  5. United States v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1971

24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. Horton v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
  2. State v. LaroccoUtah Supreme Court · 1990
  3. State v. AndersonUtah Supreme Court · 1996
  4. State v. AndersonUtah Supreme Court · 1985
  5. State v. ColeUtah Supreme Court · 1983

27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API