Legal Opinion · Dissent

Spencer v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided May 16, 1984No. 613-83Published

1DissentMiller, Judge

I dissent to the holding of the majority that the description of a “ring” and a “watch” is sufficient to satisfy the particularity requirements of a search warrant.

The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides:

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” 1

See also Art. 1, Sec. 9, Tex.…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Illinois v. GatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Coolidge v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  3. Aguilar v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
  4. Spinelli v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  5. Marron v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1927

15 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