Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Dunbar

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Decided September 27, 2004No. 3866Published

1DissentAnderson, J.

I respectfully dissent. The majority concludes the trial court erred.in failing to suppress the evidence obtained as a result of the search of the motel room because the search warrant was based on an affidavit signed by a law enforcement officer who had no direct knowledge of the information contained in the affidavit. I disagree. I vote to affirm.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

In criminal cases, the appellate court sits to review errors of law only. State v. Wilson, 345 S.C. 1, 545 S.E.2d 827 (2001). We are bound by the trial court’s factual findings unless they are clearly erroneous. State v.…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Illinois v. GatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Jones v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
  3. United States v. VentrescaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  4. United States v. SalvucciSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  5. State v. WilsonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2001

20 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