Legal Opinion
State v. Spietz
Alaska Supreme Court
Decided February 7, 1975No. 2096PublishedCited by 39 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FITZGERALD, Justice.
We take review in this case to decide whether an order by the trial court suppressing evidence was proper under the circumstances.
Respondent John Spietz was indicted for possession of marijuana with intent to sell.1 His pre-trial motion to suppress was granted 2 and the state of Alaska petitioned for review.3 Since the order of the trial court would likely result in terminating the prosecution4 and involves a controlling question of law,5 review is appropriate.
The facts are not seriously disputed and appear in the memorandum decision of the trial court. On the evening of…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Coolidge v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Chimel v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Agnello v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Hester v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Vale v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by39 opinions
- Ravin v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1975
- State v. GlassAlaska Supreme Court · 1978
- Reeves v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1979
- Schraff v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1975
- Anderson v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1976
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.