Legal Opinion

State v. Stroessenreuther

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided December 6, 2016No. COA16-151PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DIETZ, Judge.

*772 Defendant Joshua Stroessenreuther appeals from the trial court's order imposing satellite-based monitoring. Relying on the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in Grady v. North Carolina , --- U.S. ----, 135 S.Ct. 1368 , 191 L.Ed.2d 459 (2015), which held that satellite-based *773 monitoring implicates the Fourth Amendment, Stroessenreuther argues that our State's satellite-based monitoring laws are facially unconstitutional or, alternatively, unconstitutional as applied to him.

We reject Stroessenreuther's facial challenge. That challenge is premised on the notion that, because the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. City of L. A. v. PatelSupreme Court of the United States · 2015
  2. Grady v. North CarolinaSupreme Court of the United States · 2015
  3. State v. GrahamCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2009
  4. State v. BlueCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2016
  5. State v. MorrisCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2016

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. LopezCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2019
  2. State v. FritscheCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2022
  3. State v. FritscheCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2022

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

Powered by the Exa API