State v. Laflin

How courts have described this case

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

• “We hold that V.R.Cr.P. 3 was designed to both codify and enhance protections conferred by the Fourth Amendment, and that therefore the evidence seized should be suppressed under the exclusionary rule doctrine.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).