Mitchell v. State

Nevada Supreme Court

Mitchell v. State

504 P.2d 8, 88 Nev. 698

CourtNevada Supreme Court

DecidedDecember 29, 1972

DocketNo. 5908

StatusPublished

This text of 504 P.2d 8 (Mitchell v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nevada Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mitchell v. State, 504 P.2d 8, 88 Nev. 698 (Neb. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

Per Curiam:

The appellant was convicted of burglary. His counsel has submitted this appeal pursuant to the command of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), referring to any points in the record that might arguably support an appeal, Sanchez v. State, 85 Nev. 95, 450 P.2d 793 (1969).

The claim of error is that the arresting officer did not have probable cause to stop, frisk and arrest the appellant. The record shows that the arresting officer acted within permissible limits. Barnes v. State, 85 Nev. 69, 450 P.2d 150 (1969); Robertson v. State, 84 Nev. 559, 445 P.2d 352 (1968).

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

OPINION

Per Curiam:

The appellant was convicted of burglary. His counsel has submitted this appeal pursuant to the command of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), referring to any points in the record that might arguably support an appeal, Sanchez v. State, 85 Nev. 95, 450 P.2d 793 (1969).

The claim of error is that the arresting officer did not have probable cause to stop, frisk and arrest the appellant. The record shows that the arresting officer acted within permissible limits. Barnes v. State, 85 Nev. 69, 450 P.2d 150 (1969); Robertson v. State, 84 Nev. 559, 445 P.2d 352 (1968).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

504 P.2d 8, 88 Nev. 698, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mitchell-v-state-nev-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack