Legal Opinion

State v. Martin

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided November 20, 2012No. COA12-553PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

STROUD, Judge.

On 19 January 2012, defendant was ordered to “enroll in satellite-based monitoring” (“SBM”) for “the remainder of . . . [his] natural life[.]” Defendant appealed arguing solely that

[t]he trial court erred in determining that. . . [he] was required to submit to satellite-based monitoring where such monitoring would require him to waive his rights under the United States Constitution against unreasonable search and seizure or be subject to criminal prosecution for noncompliance, and where . . . [his] citizenship rights had been restored.

(original in all caps). Defendant contends…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. BowditchSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2010
  2. State v. BareCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2009
  3. Ellis-Walker Builders, Inc. v. Don Reynolds Properties, LLCCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2010

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. BlueCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2016
  2. State v. JonesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2013
  3. State v. GradyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2014
  4. State v. MooreCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2018

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API