Commonwealth v. Grimshaw

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that nighttime searches are disfavored because “nighttime police intrusion posed a great threat to privacy, violated the sanctity of home, and endangered the police and slumbering citizens”
• “Many courts have specifically or by implication rejected the claim that the nighttime search limitation has any basis in either State or the Federal Constitutions.”
• suppression unwarranted in case of nighttime search authorization where police acted “lawfully in obtaining the warrant and, except as to time, had engaged in no misconduct in executing it”
• evidence seized in violation of the law will be suppressed if the violation is substantial or rises to the level of a Federal or State constitutional violation
• “Generally, evidence seized in violation of the law will be suppressed only if the violation is substantial or rises to the level of a Federal or State constitutional violation”
• “Generally, evidence seized in violation of the law will be suppressed only if the violation is substantial or rises to the level of a Federal or State constitutional violation”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).