State v. Louchheim
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
COPELAND, Justice.
For the reasons stated below, we have determined that the defendant had a trial free from prejudicial error. His conviction is affirmed.
In his first assignment of error, the defendant contends the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress the evidence seized pursuant to the search warrant. He claims the affidavit on which the warrant was based contained false information that was crucial for the probable cause determination. We do not agree.
In Franks v. Delaware, - U.S. -, 57 L.Ed. 2d 667, 98 S.Ct. 2674 (1978), the United States Supreme Court squarely addressed…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Franks v. DelawareSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Aguilar v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- United States v. VentrescaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Andresen v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Rugendorf v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by40 opinions
- State v. BullardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1984
- State v. RookSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
- State v. HuffstetlerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1984
- State v. Ridgeway Brands Manufacturing, LLCSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2008
- State v. CroninSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.