From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Smith

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Dec 1, 1995
342 N.C. 407 (N.C. 1995)
Download
PDF
Check
Treatment

Summary

upholding as reasonable the search of defendant's underwear and the removal of crack cocaine from underneath defendant's scrotum

Summary of this case from United States v. Edwards
See 8 Summaries

Opinion

No. 125A95

Filed 8 December 1995

Appeal by the State pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-30(2) from a decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, 118 N.C. App. 106, 454 S.E.2d 680 (1995), granting the defendant a new trial. Heard in the Supreme Court 17 November 1995.

Michael F. Easley, Attorney General, by Robin P. Pendergraft, Special Deputy Attorney General, for the State.

Beaver, Holt, Richardson, Sternlicht, Burge Glazier, P.A., by Richard B. Glazier, for defendant-appellee.

American Civil Liberties Union Legal Foundation, by Deborah K. Ross, amicus curiae.

PER CURIAM.

Reversed for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion by Judge Walker.

REVERSED.

Summaries of

State v. Smith

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Dec 1, 1995
342 N.C. 407 (N.C. 1995)

upholding as reasonable the search of defendant's underwear and the removal of crack cocaine from underneath defendant's scrotum

Summary of this case from United States v. Edwards

upholding reach-in search on public roadway where officer used himself and car door to shield suspect from public view

Summary of this case from U.S. v. Williams

upholding the removal of cocaine from underneath suspect's scrotum

Summary of this case from U.S. v. Williams

adopting reasoning of dissent in State v. Smith, 118 N.C.App. 106, 454 S.E.2d 680, 687 (Walker, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part)

Summary of this case from Jenkins v. State

reversing the opinion of the Court of Appeals reported at 118 N.C. App. 106, 454 S.E.2d 680 based on dissent by Walker, J.

Summary of this case from State v. Johnson

In Smith, the officer initially used his own body and a car door to shield the defendant from public view. 118 N.C.App. at 109, 454 S.E.2d at 682.

Summary of this case from State v. Stone

In Smith, evidence was presented at the suppression hearing that the arresting officer (Officer Cook) knew the defendant, and had worked in the relevant area of Fayetteville for several years and knew it to be an area with high drug activity.

Summary of this case from State v. Battle

noting that "courts have allowed highly intrusive warrantless searches of individuals where exigent circumstances are shown to exist, such as imminent loss of evidence or potential health risk to the individual"

Summary of this case from In re I.R.T
Case details for

State v. Smith

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. ALFREDO F. SMITH, JR

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Dec 1, 1995

Citations

342 N.C. 407 (N.C. 1995)
464 S.E.2d 45

Citing Cases

State v. Stone

This Court has not written an opinion specifically addressing a similar consent search, but it has adopted a…

U.S. v. Williams

The police could not have removed the drugs that Williams stashed near his genitals without making some…

24 Citing Cases