STATE OF LOUISIANA Vs. SIDNEY ANDERSON
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF LOUISIANA * NO. 2006-KA-1031 VERSUS * COURT OF APPEAL SIDNEY ANDERSON * FOURTH CIRCUIT * STATE OF LOUISIANA * * ******* JONES, J., CONCURS WITH REASONS. While I concur in the result, I write separately solely to emphasize the critical role and credibility our system places in the importance of testimony of law enforcement officers. The only evidence justifying the violation of Anderson's Fourth Amendment rights comes from the testimony of Detective Stovall. There is no other testimony which corroborates the basis of the warrantless search. No other officer testifies that he nor she either witnessed purported drug transactions, or stopped and searched an individual after an alleged drug transaction in this case, nor did the confidential informant corroborate the testimony of Detective Stovall. Yet, I agree with the majority herein that the district court did not error in finding that the warrantless search met Constitutional muster. However, I caution, that this case clearly and unequivocally exemplifies why the testimony of peace officers at all times must be above reproach. There can never be a loss of confidence by the criminal justice system in the sworn testimony of law enforcement officers. The damage to the system when that credibility is called into question is far too detrimental to the legal system to contemplate.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
