Legal Opinion

State v. Cashion

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided July 6, 1976No. CR 76-29PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Frank Holt, Justice.

This is an interlocutory appeal by the state pursuant to Arkansas Rules of Criminal Procedure, 16.2 (d) and 36.10 (1975). The trial court held that the description “and curtilage and appurtenances contained in the description of the premises to be searched as stated on the face of the search warrant is of no legal consequence.” The court then “ordered that any and all evidence contained in any out building or on any premise other than the residence and the area [a garden] observed by [the officer] be suppressed.” We make it clear that the only issue presented is whether…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Carroll v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
  2. Taylor v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
  3. Samuel Rosencranz v. United States of America, Anthony Dipietro v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1966
  4. Clyde Albert Walker v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1955
  5. United States v. Otto Lewis MeyerCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1969

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Baird v. StateCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2003
  2. Baird v. StateCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2003
  3. State v. HowardSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2000
  4. State v. HowardSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2000

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

Powered by the Exa API