holding that “[t]he fact that defendant was handcuffed did not affect the lawfulness of the” search incident to the arrest
How later courts described this case
- holding that “[t]he fact that defendant was handcuffed did not affect the lawfulness of the” search incident to the arrest
- upholding a search under a rug in a room approximately nine feet by twelve feet when a bulge in the rug appeared to be a gun and the entire room was in the immediate control of the defendant
- "a possibility that... knowledge [of a defendant's eligibility for parole] might have been possessed by jurors will not permit a juror to attack and impeach his own verdict after it has been received by the court"
- upholding search under rug in corner of room opposite from arrestee although arrestee handcuffed, seated, and in custody of several officers
Written by the judges who cited it.
Later courts went against this
Declined to follow by Atkins v. State, 112 Nev. 1122 (1996)
Because a defendant in our jurisdication can be convicted and sentenced for both robbery and felony murder, we decline to follow . . . the reasoning set forth in Cherry. . . . [W]e note that the U.S. Supreme Court has implicitly approved the use of the underlying felony in felony murder cases as a valid aggravating circumstance to support the imposition of the death sentence.
The opinion
*115 Justice HUSKINS concurring.
I support the majority opinion in Cherry, Goodman and Johnson. At the same time, I join in the concurring opinion of Justice Carlton which correctly, I think, analyzes the results reached in these three cases.
Justice CARLTON concurs for the reasons stated in his concurring opinion filed this date in State v. Goodman, 298 N.C. 1, 36 , 257 S.E. 2d 569, 591 (1979).