Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

State v. Brian T. St. Martin, No. 2009AP1209-CR, review granted 10/27/10

decision below: certification; for St. Martin: Michael K. Gould, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate; court of appeals briefs: Resp.; Reply

Issue (from Table of Cases):

Whether the rule regarding consent to search a shared dwelling in Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. 103 (2006), which states that a warrantless search cannot be justified when a physically present resident expressly refuses consent, applies where the physically present resident is taken forcibly from his residence by law enforcement but remains in close physical proximity to the residence such that the refusal is made directly to law enforcement on the scene?

Did the seizure of illegal drugs occur as a result of a search warrant that was issued after the initial search of the premises?

Was the warrant invalid because the affidavit accompanying the warrant application contained inaccurate and misleading information?

Did the trial court err by “redacting” the affidavit after concluding that it contained false statements?

Prior post: here.

Facebooktwitterlinkedinmail
{ 0 comments… add one }

Leave a Comment