Court Opinion

ID: 9854251
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 06:03:59.705196+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:22:59.770791
License: Public Domain

Justice Webb
dissenting in part.
I dissent from that portion of the majority opinion which affirms the judgment of the Court of Appeals ordering new trials for the convictions resting on the evidence seized which was neither described in the warrant nor listed on the incident reports. The majority says, “[i]t is evident that the officers who conducted the search did not have probable cause to believe that the items in this group were stolen property at the time the seizures were consummated.” When these items were found with other items which the officers had cause to believe were stolen it seems to me the most logical inference to be drawn is that these items were probably also stolen. It is obvious the officers thought the items were probably stolen or they would not have seized them. I believe the officers were reasonable in this belief. I believe there was probable cause to believe these were stolen items and the officers properly seized them.
I concur in the rest of the majority opinion.