Legal Opinion

State v. Hyleman

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 8, 1989No. 209A88PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MARTIN, Justice.

Defendant was tried on three counts of trafficking cocaine by possessing, delivering, and selling, and on one count of possession of drug paraphernalia. We hold that defendant is entitled to a new trial because the trial judge erred in denying defendant’s motion to suppress.

The state’s evidence showed that on 25 July 1986, Detective William Durst of the Gaston County Police Department participated in a cocaine sale organized by a confidential informant. At approximately 7:00 p.m., the informant and Detective Durst met with Gene Orendorff and Jeff Manning. Durst delivered…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. United States v. LeonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. State v. ArringtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1984
  3. State v. CarterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1988
  4. State v. HunterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
  5. State v. CampbellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. State v. HuntSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1989
  2. State v. McHoneCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2003
  3. State v. PetersonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2006
  4. State v. ParsonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2016
  5. State v. GlennCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2012

8 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