Legal Opinion · Concurring in the judgment

State v. Milliorn

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided July 31, 1990No. 72270Published

1Concurring in the judgmentHiggins, Judge

Although I agree with the majority that the judgment of suppression should be affirmed, in my opinion the majority engages in unnecessary discussion of both probable cause and inevitable discovery that could lead to unintended and unwarranted perceptions. Accordingly, and with due respect for the majority, I limit my concurrence to affirmance of the judgment and adapt the substance of the opinion of the Honorable Harold L. Lowenstein for the Court of Appeals, Western District, with emphasis supplied in support of my position:

The State of Missouri appeals from the grant of a motion by…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. United States v. RossSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  2. Nix v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  3. State v. BlairSupreme Court of Missouri · 1985
  4. United States v. Loren Robie WilsonCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1980
  5. State v. ValentineSupreme Court of Missouri · 1979

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

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

Powered by the Exa API