Court Opinion

ID: 9514041
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 22:43:42.278772+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:06:10.345056
License: Public Domain

CROTHERS, Justice,
specially concurring.
[¶ 14] I concur with Part V of the majority opinion reversing the district court’s judgment because of the improper pocket search. I write separately out of concern over the majority’s lengthy discussion of pat-down searches conducted before courtesy rides in patrol cars. I acknowledge that that discussion is structured as a survey of cases reaching different results. However, I believe the discussion is unnecessary beyond simple introduction of the dispositive issue. I also believe its presence may leave the mistaken impression this Court is prepared to unanimously shift away from applying Brockel to voluntary patrol car rides. State v. Brockel, 2008 ND 50, 746 N.W.2d 423.
[¶ 15] DANIEL J. CROTHERS, CAROL RONNING KAPSNER