Legal Opinion

State v. Lockstedt

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided April 13, 2005No. NonePublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KONENKAMP, Justice.

[¶ 1.] In this automobile search case, the trial court denied a defense motion to suppress evidence seized after a drug detection dog purportedly indicated the presence of drugs in a car in which defendant was a passenger. Defendant questions whether the drug dog truly signaled the odor of an illegal substance. Because the record viewed in a light most favorable to the findings supports the circuit court’s conclusions, we-affirm.

Background

[¶ 2.] On, October 21, 2002, South Dakota Highway Patrol Trooper Brian Swets was patrolling on Interstate 90. With him was his drug…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Anderson v. City of Bessemer CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  2. Whren v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  3. Ornelas v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  4. Illinois v. CaballesSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
  5. Arkansas v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 2001

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

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. State v. OverbeySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2010
  2. State v. TiegenSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2008
  3. State v. Tam Thi Thu NguyenSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2007
  4. State v. KottmanSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2005
  5. State v. LabineSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2007

16 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