Smith's Criminal Case Compendium

Smith's Criminal Case Compendium

About

This compendium includes significant criminal cases by the U.S. Supreme Court & N.C. appellate courts, Nov. 2008 – Present. Selected 4th Circuit cases also are included.

Jessica Smith prepared case summaries Nov. 2008-June 4, 2019; later summaries are prepared by other School staff.

Instructions

Navigate using the table of contents to the left or by using the search box below. Use quotations for an exact phrase search. A search for multiple terms without quotations functions as an “or” search. Not sure where to start? The 5 minute video tutorial offers a guided tour of main features – Launch Tutorial (opens in new tab).

E.g., 04/26/2024
E.g., 04/26/2024
State v. Jordan, ___ N.C. App. ___, 2022 NCCOA 215 (Apr. 5, 2022) temp. stay granted, ___ N.C. ___, 871 S.E.2d 101 (Apr 21 2022)

Charlotte-Mecklenburg police received a report of a stolen car and information about its possible location. Officers went to the location, which was part residence and part commercial establishment. A car matching the description of the stolen vehicle was in the back parking lot. As police...

Where the defendant had no ownership or possessory interest in the warehouse that was searched, he had no standing to challenge the search on Fourth Amendment grounds.

The defendant had no standing to challenge a search of a vehicle when he was a passenger, did not own the vehicle, and asserted no possessory interest in it or its contents.

A passenger has standing to challenge a stop of a vehicle in which the passenger was riding.

As a passenger in a vehicle that was stopped, the defendant had standing to challenge the stop.

The defendant did not have standing to assert a Fourth Amendment violation regarding cellular telephone records where there was no evidence that the defendant had an ownership interest in the telephones or had been given a possessory interest by the legal owner of the telephones. Mere possession...

A passenger in a vehicle that has been stopped by the police has standing to challenge the constitutionality of the vehicle stop. 

By telling the officer that he had to ask the passenger for permission to search the vehicle, the defendant-driver waived any standing that he might have had to challenge the passenger’s consent to the search.

Show Table of Contents