Tennessee Supreme Court· 9/22/2008

State v. Day

Citations

263 S.W.3d 891
2008 Tenn. LEXIS 615
2008 WL 4287637

How courts have described this case

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

recognizing that “article I, section 7 of the Tennessee Constitution protect[s] individuals from unreasonable searches and seizures”
recognizing that “article I, section 7 of the Tennessee Constitution protects] individuals from unreasonable searches and seizures”
holding that officer lacked reasonable suspicion to stop suspect where stop was based solely on anonymous driver flashing her lights, waving her arms, and pointing at suspect’s vehicle
holding that another driver flashing her lights, waving her arms, and pointing at the defendant’s vehicle to get the officer’s attention was not sufficient to create reasonable suspicion of criminal activity and justify an investigatory stop
stating that the Preston requirements, which were incorporated into Rule 37, have been “strictly construed”
“Determining whether reasonable suspicion exists in a particular traffic stop is a fact-intensive and objective analysis.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Justice Cornelia A. Clark

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

186 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

67 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named State v. Day

173 other CourtListener records share this case name; the 50 most cited are listed.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.