Legal Opinion

State v. Karr

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 24, 1975No. 75-161PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Per curiam

Defendants allege that these searches were illegal. The argument is that the warrants were issued without probable cause and, specifically, that the affidavits in the warrants failed to provide an adequate factual basis for the judges’ findings of probable cause.

In each case, the affiant was a police officer, and in each case the warrant was issued on the basis of information received from an unnamed confidential informant. In State v Karr, the affidavit stated that: “Information received from a reliable informant, who has given reliable and factual information in the past which has led to…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Aguilar v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
  2. Spinelli v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  3. Jones v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
  4. United States v. VentrescaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  5. United States v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1971

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. State v. RobertsOhio Supreme Court · 1980
  2. State v. NaboznyOhio Supreme Court · 1978
  3. State v. HackneyOhio Court of Appeals · 2016
  4. State v. GraddyOhio Supreme Court · 1978
  5. State v. YanowitzOhio Court of Appeals · 1980

14 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