Legal Opinion

State v. Fleming

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided May 5, 1992No. 9118SC673PublishedCited by 41 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WELLS, Judge.

Defendant argues the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress. Defendant contends the findings of fact were insufficient to support the trial court’s conclusions of law regarding the reasonableness of the seizure.

In our review of the denial of defendant’s motion to suppress, we must first determine whether there was competent evidence to support the trial court’s underlying findings of fact. If the evidence presented was competent, the findings are conclusive and binding on appeal. State v. Cooke, 306 N.C. 132, 291 S.E.2d 618 (1982). We must then determine whether the…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Mapp v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
  3. Florida v. BostickSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  4. Ker v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  5. California v. Hodari D.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991

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

3Cited by41 opinions

  1. State v. WatkinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1994
  2. State v. WilsonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1993
  3. In re J.L.B.M.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2006
  4. Tucker v. HollandWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1985
  5. State v. IsenhourCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2008

36 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