Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Mathews

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided March 20, 1997No. 20154, 21127Published

1DissentJustice Silak

I respectfully dissent. The Court’s opinion holds that the lack of signature invalidates the search warrant, and that therefore the evidence obtained, the murder weapon and incriminating shoes, should have been suppressed. I disagree, for three reasons: (1) the Idaho Constitution does not by its language require in each and every ease that to be valid a search warrant must be signed by a judge; (2) the criminal rules of this Court do not require that a search warrant be “signed” but only “issued” by a judge, and these rules take precedence over conflicting statutory provisions; and (3) even…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. United States v. William D. TurnerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1977
  2. State v. YoderIdaho Supreme Court · 1975
  3. State v. CurringtonIdaho Supreme Court · 1985
  4. Commonwealth v. PellegriniMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1989
  5. State v. MaxeyIdaho Supreme Court · 1994

7 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