Court Opinion

ID: 9713622
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 05:18:54.943693+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:23:19.617593
License: Public Domain

*410Krivosha, C.J.,
concurring in the result.
I concur in the result reached by the majority in this court. I write separately, however, to express my belief that the development of the film in the camera was not proper and was not a part of the authorized search of the van. I believe, however, that the evidence obtained by reason of developing the film, in light of all the other evidence in this case, was without prejudice and therefore does not justify granting to the appellants a new trial. See Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 87 S. Ct. 824, 17 L. Ed. 2d 705 (1967).
Caporale, J., joins in this concurrence.