State v. Gabbard

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the “No Trespassing” sign on a fence adjacent to the defendant’s driveway “was inadequate to exclude visitors who would use the drive- way to make contact with the occupants of the house”
• concluding that “no trespassing” sign on boundary fence, without more, would not have served to exclude the “reasonable visitor . . . who desired to contact the residents” and that, therefore, officers could rightfully use driveway to approach house
• bending down and peeking through a crack in siding constituted a search
• where an officer does not see a “No Trespassing” sign while making no deliberate effort to avoid seeing it, the sign does not adequately manifest defendant’s intent to exclude visitors
• defendant impliedly consented to contact by shed across from house, as opposed to front door of house, because he walked out of shed and went up to detectives to speak with them
• defendant impliedly consented to contact by shed across from house, as opposed to front door of house, because he walked out of shed and went up to detectives to speak with them

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).