State v. Turnbull
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
VAUGHN, Judge.
Defendant challenges the court’s ruling denying his motion to suppress the evidence obtained as a result of the search of the premises. Defendant contends that the entry made by the officers was illegal as a violation of G.S. 15-44. Defendant correctly observes that the question of whether there was an actual breaking of the door is not determinative of the issue. The right sought to be protected is the right against unreasonable searches and seizures. U.S. Const. amend. IV; N.C. Const. art. 1, § 20.
Ordinarily, an officer of the law may not enter a citizen’s dwelling except…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Mapp v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Ker v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Gouled v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
- State v. ColsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
- State v. ReamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- State v. WalkerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984
- State v. GainesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1977
- State v. DorseyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983
- State v. BurtonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1974
- State v. LombardoCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1981
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.