Legal Opinion
State v. Tindall
Court of Appeals of South Carolina
Decided June 5, 2008No. 4402PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtShort, J.
In this criminal action, Terry T. Tindall appeals the trial court’s ruling that a search and seizure did not violate the Fourth Amendment. Tindall also appeals the trial court’s failure to charge the jury on the issue of third-party guilt. We affirm.
FACTS
On the morning of April 15, 2004, Oconee County Sheriffs Deputy Sergeant Dale Colegrove was patrolling part of Interstate 85 in Oconee County. Colegrove stopped Tindall about 7 a.m. for speeding and following another vehicle too closely. Colegrove wrote Tindall a warning ticket but continued to talk to him. Approximately fifteen to twenty…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Florida v. RoyerSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Whren v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- United States v. SokolowSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- United States v. Denny Ray HunnicuttCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1998
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- State v. TindallSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2010
- State v. RiveraCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2009
- State v. RiveraCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2009
- State v. RiveraCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2009
- State v. TindallSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2010
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.