stating that, “[t]hough the language in the North Carolina Constitution (Article I, Sec. 20), providing in substance that any search or seizure must be ‘supported by evidence,’ is markedly different from that in the federal constitution, there is no variance between the search and seizure law of North Carolina and the requirements of the Fourth Amendment as interpreted by the Supreme Court of the United States”
Summary of this case from State v. Verkerk1980
stating that, “[t]hough the language in the North Carolina Constitution (Article I, Sec. 20), providing in substance that any search or seizure must be ‘supported by evidence,’ is markedly different from that in the federal constitution, there is no variance between the search and seizure law of North Carolina and the requirements of the Fourth Amendment as interpreted by the Supreme Court of the United States”
Summary of this case from State v. VerkerkFull title:PETITIONS FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW
Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina
Date published: Jan 1, 1980
Consistently with those principles, this Court and the Supreme Court have clearly held that, as far as the…
State v. YoungThere is no requirement in our law that an included offense must also be one which is subject to less…