Court Opinion

ID: 9564432
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 19:00:29.141119+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:18:24.354434
License: Public Domain

GOLDEN, Justice,
concurring specially.
I concur in the affirmance of the defendant’s conviction on two counts of delivery of a controlled substance, although I disagree with much of the majority’s treatment of the several issues raised, particularly the validity of the search warrant and the admissibility of the letter from defendant’s daughter. In my view, the assigned errors are harmless in the face of the eyewitness testimony from Karol Potter that the defendant sold her two ounces of marijuana on November 11, 1992, and a quarter pound of marijuana on December 17, 1992.
I also agree with that said by Justice Lehman in his dissenting opinion when he makes the important point that Wyoming case law must be the foundation of this Court’s treatment of the issues. In this case, however, I do not find it necessary to treat all the many issues raised here.