State v. Schmalz
North Dakota Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
KAPSNER, Justice.
[¶ 1] Steven Schmalz appeals from two criminal judgments following his conditional guilty pleas for possession of marijuana in both Burleigh and Morton counties, arguing the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence. We affirm the criminal judgments.
I
[¶ 2] Burleigh County Sheriffs Deputy Simon Scheett received “intel,” allegedly indicating Schmalz “had involvement with narcotics.” Based on this information, Deputy Scheett began an investigation of Schmalz. As part of the investigation, Deputy Scheett, along with another officer, searched trash that had been…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Franks v. DelawareSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- California v. GreenwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Litchfield v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 2005
- State v. WoinarowiczNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2006
- State v. MischeNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1989
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by40 opinions
- State v. KieperNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2008
- State v. KurucNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2014
- State of Minnesota v. David Ford McMurraySupreme Court of Minnesota · 2015
- State v. SorensonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2009
- State v. LundeNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2008
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.