State v. Casteel
Court of Appeals of Iowa
1Dissent
DONIELSON, Presiding Judge.
I respectfully dissent. The majority is convinced that “something smells fishy” in this case and is far too willing as an appellate tribunal to reverse. The tone of the majority opinion suggests an unnecessary skepticism towards the police’s actions, which leads them to ultimately determine this search was a sham or pretext and, therefore, unreasonable.
A probative fact which the majority omits from its discussion is that no evidence indicates that the police knew this defendant, the police knew this defendant was either a dealer or user of drugs, or had any reason…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- State v. JewellSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1976
- State v. ProberWisconsin Supreme Court · 1980
- Miller v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1981
- State v. GoodrichSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
- State v. RothSupreme Court of Iowa · 1981
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.