Legal Opinion

State v. Foster

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided May 4, 1977No. 7618SC838PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CLARK, Judge.

The denial of defendants’ motions to suppress was not error. The constitutional right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures may be waived. State v. Vestal, 278 N.C. 561, 180 S.E. 2d 755 (1971). The lawful user of a car may consent to its search. 68 Am. Jur. 2d, Searches and Seizures § 53 (1973). Passengers in a car may not object to incriminating evidence seized pursuant to a warrantless search when the owner or person having possession and control of the car consented to the search. State v. Grant, 279 N.C. 337, 182 S.E. 2d 400 (1971); State v. Raynes, 272 N.C. 488,…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. North Carolina v. PearceSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. State v. VestalSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
  3. State v. BrowerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
  4. State v. AlfordSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
  5. State v. LittleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Richard Anthony Hoots v. Harry Allsbrook Attorney General of the State of North Carolina, Rufus L. EdmistenCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1986
  2. State v. RozierCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984
  3. United States v. Lorgio D. Morales, Jr. United States of America v. Luis L. Viera. United States of America v. Luis L. VieraCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1988
  4. Ledda v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware · 1989
  5. State v. McDanielsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1991

6 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