North Carolina Suppress Conclusions Checkpoint Remand Reverse Vacate Lawyers Attorneys

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. SHANNON DENISE HAISLIP

SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA

The State of North Carolina seeks review of the unanimous Court of Appeals decision reversing the denial of defendant's motion to suppress the evidence used to convict her for driving while impaired and remanding for appropriate findings of fact and conclusions of law as to the constitutionality of a checkpoint. The State asserts that the Court of Appeals erred in holding that (1) defendant was "stopped" within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment; and (2) the constitutionality of the checkpoint is at issue, in that defendant evaded the checkpoint.

ISSUES:

Whether the stop was violative of Defendant's Fourth Amendment rights.

DISCUSSION:

On review of a motion to suppress evidence, an appellate court determines whether trial court's findings of fact are supported by the evidence and whether the findings of fact support the conclusions of law. The trial court's findings of fact "are conclusive on appeal if supported by competent evidence, even if the evidence is conflicting." Although the trial transcript indicates that the trial judge believed defendant "wasn't snared by the checkpoint," the transcript is devoid of any formal, specific findings of fact or conclusions of law as to what transpired on the evening of defendant's arrest. Defendant was not stopped by the checkpoint." Indeed, although the trial judge stated at the very end of the proceedings that he had "written out in hand findings and conclusions on the evidentiary hearing with respect to the motion to suppress the evidence," the transcript reveals no ruling at all on the motion to suppress, and no such order was included in the record presented either to this Court or the Court of Appeals.

JUDGMENT:

The Court held that the record before it is inadequate to permit appellate review of the questions of law presented by the State's appeal, in that the record contains no order or ruling on defendant's motion to suppress, the decision of the Court of Appeals was vacated, and the case was remanded with direction to further remand to the Superior Court in Pitt County for written findings of fact and conclusions of law sufficient to resolve all issues raised by the motion to suppress.

Disclaimer:

These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm's unofficial views of the Justices' opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content

North Carolina Suppress Conclusions Checkpoint Remand Reverse Vacate Lawyers Attorneys

By: Atchuthan Sriskandarajah

POST COMMENT

Inventory Investing - How to Acquire In excess of The Counter Stocks and shares The Finest Spot to Commence Investing in Shares - Canada's Big 9 Financial institutions The Importance of Selecting the appropriate Divorce process Lawyer Your Guide To Retirement plan Preparing Car Wreck Lawyers – Do You Need One? Retirement Planning - Do Pensions Still Exist? Avoid the adverse effects of DWI cases by taking the assistance of an experienced DWI Lawyer The Very best Penny Shares in 2009? The Guess Operate Lastly Eliminated From Penny Inventory Investing! DWI Lawyers Who Can Help You Escape the Complex Laws Why Need a Criminal Defense Lawyer in a DUI Charge? Criminal Lawyers In Northampton - Boost Your Chances Of Walking Out Free Divorce Lawyers North Carolina Absolute Divorce Counterclaim Custody Temporary Order Lawyers Attorneys