Amica v. State

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that nine-month lapse from the crimes’ occurrences to the issuance of a warrant did not invalidate probable cause for search warrant
• holding that in the absence of a ruling by the trial court, we have nothing to review
• holding that in the 1 We note that while dismissal of these appeals is proper, the State’s motions in Case Numbers A25A1066 and A25A1067 do not correctly identify the orders which Hargreaves seeks to appeal. absence of a ruling by the trial court, we have nothing to review
• explaining that this Court is a court for correction of errors of law made by the trial court, which have as their bases specific rulings made by the trial court, and in the absence of such a ruling, the claim of error presents nothing for this Court to review
• in the absence of a ruling by the trial court, we have nothing to review
• in the absence of a ruling by the trial court, we have nothing to review

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).