Commonwealth v. Edmunds
Pennsylvania Supreme Court
586 A.2d 887 (Pa. 1991)
Facts
In August 1985, police received an anonymous tip that Edmunds (defendant) was growing marijuana in a building on his property. During the course of the subsequent investigation, the police obtained a warrant, searched the building, and found marijuana plants. At trial on multiple charges, the trial court found that the search warrant was invalid because the affidavit in support of the warrant lacked probable cause to establish a timeframe for when the informants obtained their information. The trial court found that the police acted in good-faith reliance on the warrant, however, and refused to exclude evidence from the search at trial. Following his conviction, Edmunds appealed. The superior court affirmed the trial court’s judgment, and Edmunds appealed again.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Cappy, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 710,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,600 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
