Court Opinion

ID: 9520019
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 01:29:33.747643+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:45:27.209596
License: Public Domain

*424Beasley, J.
(dissenting). I respectfully dissent.
I accept the correctness of the recitals of fact contained in the majority opinion.
In reviewing a trial court’s order to suppress evidence and dismiss the charges, this Court applies a "clearly erroneous” standard.1 A finding is "clearly erroneous” when, although there is evidence to support it, the reviewing court, on the entire evidence, is left with a firm conviction that a mistake has been made.2
In this case, I do not find the trial court’s analysis and findings in conflict with the decisions of this Court in People v Garcia,3 People v Cavitt,4 or People v Strong.5 While recognizing that, like the three cited cases, this is also a close case, I would not find the trial court’s decision clearly erroneous. Consequently, I would affirm.

 People v Goss, 89 Mich 598; 280 NW2d 608 (1979), People v Ulrich, 83 Mich App 19; 268 NW2d 269 (1978), People v Robertson, 81 Mich App 446; 265 NW2d 365 (1978), People v Terrell, 77 Mich App 676; 259 NW2d 187 (1977).

 People v Goss, supra, People v Hummel, 19 Mich App 266, 270; 172 NW2d 550 (1969).

 81 Mich App 260; 265 NW2d 115 (1978).

 86 Mich App 59; 272 NW2d 196 (1979).

 77 Mich App 281; 258 NW2d 205 (1977).