# State v. Rose

> Court of Appeals of North Carolina · May 17, 2005 · 170 N.C. App. 284

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9566869

## Case

- **Full name:** STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. JUSTIN EVERETT ROSE, Defendant
- **Court:** Court of Appeals of North Carolina
- **Decided:** May 17, 2005
- **Citations:** 170 N.C. App. 284; 612 S.E.2d 336; 2005 N.C. App. LEXIS 1015
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Timmons-Goodson
- **Judges:** Geer, Tyson, Timmons-Goodson
- **Cited by:** 31 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9566869

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that license and registration checking stations advance an “important purpose
- holding once the trial court denied the defendant's motion to suppress, he was not required to object again to preserve argument for appeal

## Opinion text

TIMMONS-GOODSON, Judge,
concurring in the result.
“The scope of review on appeal of the denial of a defendant’s motion to suppress is strictly limited to determining whether the trial court’s findings of fact are supported by competent evidence, in which case they are binding on appeal, and in turn, whether those findings support the trial court’s conclusions of law.” State v. Corpening, 109 N.C. App. 586, 587-88 , 427 S.E.2d 892, 893 (1993). In the instant case, because I believe the trial court’s findings of fact are insufficient to support its ultimate conclusions of law, I agree with the holding reached by the majority.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9566869. Public record. Not legal advice.