Legal Opinion

State v. Lum

Court of Appeals of Kansas

Decided February 25, 2000No. 83,079PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Rogg, J.:

The State makes an interlocutoiy appeal of the trial court’s decision to suppress evidence.

A search warrant was issued for the search of defendant Michael Lum’s residence. Lum subsequently filed a motion to suppress the evidence, in which he argued that the information supporting the warrant failed to provide probable cause for the issuance of the warrant.

The trial court granted Lum’s motion. The State now brings an interlocutory appeal of the trial court’s decision. The State contends that the court erred in suppressing the evidence found at Lum’s Salina residence. This contention…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. United States v. LeonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. State v. GrissomSupreme Court of Kansas · 1992
  3. State v. WakefieldSupreme Court of Kansas · 1999
  4. State v. ValdezSupreme Court of Kansas · 1999
  5. State v. DoileSupreme Court of Kansas · 1989

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. FisherSupreme Court of Kansas · 2007
  2. State v. HendricksCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 2003
  3. State v. PowellCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 2011
  4. State v. FisherSupreme Court of Kansas · 2007

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

Powered by the Exa API