Legal Opinion

State v. Grindstaff

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided October 15, 1985No. 8524SC194Published

1Opinion of the Court

HEDRICK, Chief Judge.

We note at the outset that defendant’s notice of appeal was not timely given. The State has not addressed this issue, however, and we have elected to treat this appeal as a petition for a writ of certiorari and allow the same in order to pass on the merits of defendant’s appeal.

Defendant first assigns error to the trial court’s denial of his motion to suppress on the following grounds: 1) the warrantless search was not based on any exigent circumstances; 2) defendant, as a condition of an earlier probation, had consented to war-rantless searches of his person or premises…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Coolidge v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  2. Hester v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
  3. State v. PrevetteCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1979
  4. State v. CarterCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
  5. State v. SimmonsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984

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

Powered by the Exa API