State v. Sagner

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “matters which were in the officers’ knowledge but were not put before the magistrate” can play no role in our probable cause determination
• concluding that officers were \rightfully in defendants' home\ because the warrant was partially valid and then evaluating whether officers encountered the challenged evidence \in the course of a search which was properly limited in scope\
• explaining that, in deciding whether a search warrant is supported by probable cause, we are to consider only those facts within the “four corners” of the affidavit
• adopting the court’s severance reasoning in Aday v. Superior Court of Alameda Cty., 55 Cal 2d 789, 797, 362 P2d 47, 52 (1961)
• assessing whether the items found in plain view “were obvi- ous evidence of crime”; “[t]hat is, assuming that the items were legitimately encountered, was it evident that they were stolen goods?”
• assessing whether the items found in plain view “were obvi- ous evidence of crime”; “[t]hat is, assuming that the items were legitimately encountered, was it evident that they were stolen goods?”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).