Rowland v. State
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Opinion of the Court
John A. Fogleman, Justice.
Roger Rowland was found guilty of possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver. The judgment of conviction must be reversed for at least two reasons.
The first reason for reversal is error of the trial court in holding that physical evidence taken from appellant when he was searched at the time of his arrest was admissible in evidence. On the record before us, this ruling cannot be upheld because of the absence of any evidence establishing the reliability of an informer. At an omnibus hearing, the prosecution stated there was an informer, who would not…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- United States v. ChadwickSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Cary v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1976
- Freeman v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1975
- Walton v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1968
- Lunsford v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1977
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- Pueblo v. Martínez TorresSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1988
- Kilpatrick v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1995
- Mitchell v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1988
- Crafton v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1981
- Richardson v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1986
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.