Legal Opinion

State v. Langdon

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided June 20, 1989No. 8818SC1064PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

EAGLES, Judge.

Defendant’s first argument is that the trial court abused its discretion in summarily dismissing her first motion to suppress. Defendant’s second argument is that the trial court erroneously denied her second motion to suppress. We find no prejudicial error.

A defendant who seeks to suppress evidence must comply with the procedural requirements of G.S. 15A-971, et seq. See State v. Satterfield, 300 N.C. 621, 624, 268 S.E. 2d 510, 513 (1980). Our General Assembly may impose reasonable prerequisites on motions to suppress evidence, and the failure to meet those requirements…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. DetterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
  2. State v. SatterfieldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
  3. State v. HollowaySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1984
  4. State v. HarrisCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984
  5. State v. KramerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. O'ConnorCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2012
  2. State v. WoolridgeCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2001

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

Powered by the Exa API