State v. Christian Allis
Supreme Court of Vermont
1DissentEaton, J.
¶ 20. I disagree with the majority in two fundamental respects and I therefore dissent. First, the majority fails to give the trial court the deference it is owed as the factfinder and instead draws its own factual conclusions. Second, relying on those factual conclusions, the majority then proceeds to misapply the law as it relates to consent to enter a home.
¶ 21. At the most basic level, this case hinges on one question: would a reasonable person have understood defendant's girlfriend's gesture as giving the officer consent to enter their home? See State v. Stevens, 2004 VT 23, ¶ 13, 176…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- State v. MendozaCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2012
- United States v. Elmer Curtis TurbyfillCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1975
- State v. LawrenceSupreme Court of Vermont · 2003
- State v. Weisler, State v. KingSupreme Court of Vermont · 2011
- State v. FreemanSupreme Court of Vermont · 2004
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.