Opinion ID: 2364678
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: standard of review

Text: [¶ 6] The applicable standard of review has been stated as follows: When we review a district court's decision to deny motions to suppress, we defer to the district court's findings of fact unless they are clearly erroneous. Fertig v. State, 2006 WY 148, ¶ 8, 146 P.3d 492, 495 (Wyo.2006); O'Boyle v. State, 2005 WY 83, ¶ 18, 117 P.3d 401, 407 (Wyo.2005). The evidence is viewed in a light favorable to the district court's determination, because that court had the opportunity to hear the evidence and assess the credibility of the witnesses. Hicks v. State, 2008 WY 83, ¶ 13, 187 P.3d 877, 880 (Wyo.2008). The issue of lawwhether a search was unreasonable and in violation of constitutional rightsis reviewed de novo. Fertig, ¶ 8, 146 P.3d at 495; McChesney v. State, 988 P.2d 1071, 1074 (Wyo.1999). Lovato v. State, 2010 WY 38, ¶ 11, 228 P.3d 55, 57-58 (Wyo.2010).