Legal Opinion
State v. Edman
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided August 23, 2005No. AC 25033PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
GRUENDEL, J.
The principal issue raised in this appeal is whether the trial court improperly denied a motion to suppress evidence seized from the defendant’s home where the defendant asserted in his motion that the underlying search and seizure warrant had been issued by a magistrate 1 who was not neutral and detached as required by the fourth amendment to the United States constitution and article first, § 7, of the constitution of Connecticut. Because we agree that, under the unique circumstances of this case, the issuing judge did not qualify as the neutral and detached magistrate…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Coolidge v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Delaware v. ProuseSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Johnson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Lo-Ji Sales, Inc. v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- State v. GeislerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1992
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- State v. EdmanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2007
- State v. EdmanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2005