State v. Capps
New Mexico Supreme Court
1DissentSosa, Senior Justice
I respectfully dissent.
I cannot join in the majority opinion for the following reasons:
1. The United States Supreme Court has consistently held that the “automobile exception” to the warrant requirement does not justify the warrantless search of a closed container found inside the luggage compartment of an automobile. Yet, the majority purposely ignores the clear mandate of the United States Supreme Court in Robbins v. California, - U.S. -, 101 S.Ct. 2841, 69 L.Ed.2d 744 (1981); Arkansas v. Sanders, 442 U.S. 753, 99 S.Ct. 2586, 61 L.Ed.2d 235 (1979); United States v. Chadwick, 433 U.S. 1, 97…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Mapp v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Carroll v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Chimel v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Chambers v. MaroneySupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Sibron v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.