Legal Opinion
State v. One 1981 BMW Automobile
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided August 23, 1988No. 5566PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtO’Connell, J.
The state appeals from the judgment of dismissal of an in rem forfeiture action brought pursuant to General Statutes § SLSSg.1 The state claims *591that the trial court erred (1) in finding that the information contained in the search and seizure warrant underlying this action was “stale” and did not support a determination of probable cause, and (2) in holding that the in rem action could not be sustained without an allegation of criminal activity on behalf of the vehicle’s owner. We find error.
*592The factual background of this case is long and convoluted. In 1985, the state’s first attempt to have…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Ker v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Calero-Toledo v. Pearson Yacht Leasing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Sgro v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- George Washington Durham v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1968
- Leo v. LeoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1985
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Connecticut National Bank v. GiacomiSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
- Plasil v. TablemanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1992
- Najee Finique Hairston v. Commonwealth of VirginiaCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 2017
- Metropolitan District Commission v. American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees, Council 4, Local 3713Connecticut Appellate Court · 1994
- State v. TrahanConnecticut Appellate Court · 1997
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.