State v. Guzman
Supreme Court of Vermont
1Opinion of the CourtBurgess, J.
¶ 1. Defendant appeals his convictions for possession of cocaine and marijuana. On appeal, defendant claims that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress statements and evidence seized from his person and his vehicle because: (1) defendant’s consent to search his person was not given voluntarily; (2) defendant’s Miranda rights were violated; and (3) police seized defendant’s automobile for an unreasonable period of time. Defendant also appeals the court’s denial of his motion for reconsideration. We conclude that the search of defendant’s person was constitutional as incident…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- State v. BadgerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1982
- United States v. Deunte L. HumphriesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2004
- State v. SecristWisconsin Supreme Court · 1999
- State v. BrillonSupreme Court of Vermont · 2008
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- State v. SennaSupreme Court of Vermont · 2013
- Gregory W. Zullo v. State of VermontSupreme Court of Vermont · 2019
- State v. Weisler, State v. KingSupreme Court of Vermont · 2011
- State v. Ellie May MorseSupreme Court of Vermont · 2019
- State v. DelaozSupreme Court of Vermont · 2011
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.