DiPasquale v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that although objectively there was probable cause to believe that the bag contained marijuana, the officer could not arrest the defendant for possessing the bag because the officer did not subjectively believe or even suspect that the bag contained marijuana
• `Warrantless Fourth Amendment intrusions are presumptively unreasonable... and the burden is allocated to the State of showing adequate justification for the exceptional departure from the Fourth Amendment norm'
• ‘Warrant-less Fourth Amendment intrusions are presumptively unreasonable ...' and the burden is allocated to the State of showing adequate justification for the exceptional departure from the Fourth Amendment norm’
• “Warrantless Fourth Amendment intrusions are presumptively unreasonable ... and the burden is allocated to the State of showing adequate justification for the exceptional departure from the Fourth Amendment norm”
• “An officer’s factual interpretation is pertinent even if his legal interpretation is not.”
• in evaluating a plain view search, we stated that “[t]he subjective 19 belief in the officer’s mind is critical, for the entire thrust of the Fourth Amendment and its exclusionary rule is aimed at the reasonableness of police conduct.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).