State v. Commodore
This text of 483 So. 2d 1003 (State v. Commodore) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
concurring.
I respectfully concur.
[1004]*1004I disagree with the majority s conclusion that an arrest had been effected prior to the search of the defendants’ vehicle. An arrest is effected when there are “circumstances indicating an intent to effect an extended restraint on the liberty of the accused.”
However, the majority correctly held that the search did not violate the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution because the automobile exception to the warrant requirement applies. Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132, 158, 45 S.Ct. 280, 287, 69 L.Ed. 453 (1925); see also Chambers v. Maroney, 399 U.S. 42, 90 S.Ct. 1975, 26 L.Ed.2d 419 (1970).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
483 So. 2d 1003, 1986 La. LEXIS 8124, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-commodore-la-1986.