State v. Romano

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the officers could not reasonably rely on the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule where they never attempted to obtain a warrant
• “Under the totality of the circumstances, considering the alleged exigencies of the situation, the warrantless blood draw was not objectively reasonable.”
• warrantless blood (i) the person’s operating privilege will be suspended upon refusal to submit to chemical testing; and (ii) if the person refuses to submit to chemical testing, upon conviction or plea for violating section 3802(a)(1

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Bailey v. the State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 2016-07-13· cited 16×
• State v. Burris
  Court of Appeals of North Carolina· 2017-05-16· cited 2×
• State v. Burris
  Court of Appeals of North Carolina· 2017-03-21
• State v. Romano
  Court of Appeals of North Carolina· 2019-11-19

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• United States v. Leon
  Supreme Court· 1984-09-18· cited 9,230×
• Coolidge v. New Hampshire
  Supreme Court· 1971-06-21· cited 9,038×
• Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives' Assn.
  Supreme Court· 1989-03-21· cited 2,560×
• Jones v. United States
  Supreme Court· 1958-06-30· cited 919×
• Winston v. Lee
  Supreme Court· 1985-03-20· cited 733×