Legal Opinion
State v. Murray
Supreme Court of Vermont
Decided February 3, 1976No. 78-75PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLarrow, J.
The respondent appeals his conviction below for burglary, claiming it resulted from an unreasonable search and seizure. The issue raised is the “station house search” without warrant of an automobile in which respondent had been a passenger when it was stopped on the highway. A silver wedding bell taken in the burglary was found in the auto glove compartment, and admitted as an exhibit on trial.
Only because the parties are in substantial agreement with respect to all the relevant facts are we able to dispose of the issue presented. Beyond the docket notation that respondent’s motion to…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Coolidge v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Chambers v. MaroneySupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Cady v. DombrowskiSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Cardwell v. LewisSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Arthur Earl Marshall v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1970
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- State v. BadgerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1982
- State v. SenecalSupreme Court of Vermont · 1985
- State v. PlattSupreme Court of Vermont · 1990
- State v. GreenslitSupreme Court of Vermont · 1989
- W. R. Sorg & North Hero House, Inc. v. North Hero Zoning Board of AdjustmentSupreme Court of Vermont · 1977
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.