Legal Opinion

State v. Burkholder

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided July 25, 1984No. 83-1959PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSweeney, J.

The critical issue posed by this appeal is one of first impression before this court, and involves important constitutional considerations. We must decide whether evidence obtained in an unreasonable or unlawful search and seizure, while inadmissible in a trial, is nevertheless admissible in a subsequent probation revocation proceeding. Stated differently, we must determine whether the exclusionary rule is applicable in a probation revocation proceeding.

The appellant contends, inter alia, that the exclusionary rule should not apply to probation revocation proceedings, because the rule is a…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Mapp v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
  3. United States v. CalandraSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  4. Elkins v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
  5. Olmstead v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1928

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. State v. AndrewsOhio Supreme Court · 1991
  2. Friedman v. Commissioner of Public SafetySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1991
  3. Payne v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
  4. State v. RobertsOhio Supreme Court · 1987
  5. Commonwealth v. OlsenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1989

13 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