Legal Opinion

State v. Muhammad

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided March 7, 2017No. COA16-306Published

1Opinion of the Court

CALABRIA, Judge.

Where the evidence that defendant sought to suppress was available from another source, any error in denying defendant's motion to suppress was harmless. Where defendant failed to preserve constitutional objections to satellite-based monitoring ("SBM"), they will not be considered for the first time on appeal. A claim for ineffective assistance of counsel is not available on appeal from a civil proceeding, such as an SBM hearing. We find no prejudicial error in part, and dismiss defendant's appeal in part.

I. Factual and Procedural Background

B.W. was 14 years old when she ran…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. State v. CookeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
  2. State v. HughesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2000
  3. Grady v. North CarolinaSupreme Court of the United States · 2015
  4. State v. AllenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2006
  5. State v. BrooksCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2010

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