Legal Opinion

State v. Cowley

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1987No. 15526PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Per curiam

Defendant appeals from his conviction and sentence for possessing more than ten pounds of marijuana. SDCL 22-42-6. We affirm.

Defendant pleaded not guilty to the charges against him. In the course of this prosecution defendant made a motion to suppress. The motion to suppress was made on the grounds that defendant had given statements to law enforcement officers while he was in custody but had not been informed of his Miranda 1 rights. After the trial court denied defendant’s motion to suppress, he petitioned to enter a plea of nolo contendere. See SDCL 23A-7-2 (pleas by defendant). The trial…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. State v. JanssenSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1985
  3. State v. GroshSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1986
  4. United States v. Melvin Richard MizellCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1973
  5. State v. ArnsbergCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1976

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. People v. EatonMichigan Court of Appeals · 1990
  2. State v. AndersonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1988
  3. State v. HoeftSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1999
  4. State v. CeplechaSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2020
  5. State v. AndrewsSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2007

7 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