Legal Opinion

State v. Thompson

Idaho Court of Appeals

Decided January 26, 1988No. 16145PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BURNETT, Judge.

The state brings this interlocutory appeal from an order suppressing evidence obtained through a wiretap. Although the wiretap was authorized by a warrant, the district court suppressed the evidence because the application for the warrant contained information generated by a pen register which had been installed without a judicial determination of probable cause. Today we must decide whether use of the pen register was an issue properly before the district court and, if so, whether the court was correct in ruling that probable cause must be established before a pen register may…

2Cases cited78 opinions

  1. Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Illinois v. GatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  3. Katz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  4. Johnson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
  5. Smith v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1979

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. State v. ThompsonIdaho Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Hoskins v. HowardIdaho Supreme Court · 1998
  3. State v. BrownIdaho Court of Appeals · 1987
  4. Shaktman v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1988
  5. Saldana v. StateWyoming Supreme Court · 1993

4 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