Legal Opinion

State v. Brewster

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided December 15, 2011No. CR 11-618PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DONALD L. CORBIN, Justice.

| pursuant to Rule 3(a)(1) of the Arkansas Rules of Appellate Procedure-Criminal, the State of Arkansas has filed this interlocutory appeal from the order of the Pulaski County Circuit Court granting the motion of Appellees, Tammy Brewster and Jeremy Pennington, to suppress physical evidence. For reversal, the State contends that the circuit court erred as a matter of law in its interpretation of the “reasonably foreseeable” test concerning police-created exigent circumstances adopted in Mann v. State, 357 Ark. 159, 161 S.W.3d 826 (2004), and urges this court to…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Kentucky v. KingSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
  2. Arkansas v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
  3. State v. BrownSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2004
  4. State v. NicholsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2005
  5. Mann v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2004

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. McWilliamsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2017
  2. State of Arkansas v. Matthew KirchnerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2021
  3. State v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2013
  4. State v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2013

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API