Legal Opinion

State v. Mancia-Sandoval

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided March 18, 2010No. CR 09-1094PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PAUL E. DANIELSON, Justice.

liAppellant State of Arkansas appeals from the circuit court’s order granting a motion to suppress evidence in favor of appellees Jose Adilio Mancia-Sandoval and Osires Guevara. The State’s sole point on appeal is that, because a pretextual stop is not prohibited by the Arkansas or federal constitutions, the circuit court erred in suppressing evidence discovered following a canine sniff of a vehicle that was validly detained on probable cause. Appellees did not file a response. We agree with the State and reverse and remand.

The record reveals the following facts.…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Whren v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  2. United States v. RobinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  3. Ohio v. RobinetteSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  4. Davis v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2003
  5. Mings v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1994

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. State of Iowa v. Scottize Danyelle BrownSupreme Court of Iowa · 2019
  2. State v. K.H.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 2010
  3. State v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2010
  4. Rainey v. StateCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2017
  5. Cassinelli v. StateCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2013

12 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