State v. McCumber (2017)
green
· 46 citation events
across 3 courts.
Showing the 5 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 2017 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
201720212026
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
State v. Storey (2017)
Thus, the United States Supreme Court appears to have foreclosed any argument that a warrantless blood test for a drug other than alcohol, such as marijuana, can be justified under the search incident to arrest exception. {30} The State argues that Birchfield’s holding should not be applied retroactively, but the rule is to the contrary. “[A] new rule for the conduct of criminal prosecutions is to be applied retroactively to all cases, state or federal, pending on direct rev…
noting that “with Birchfield pronouncing a new constitutional rule, it applies retroactively to any case on direct appeal”
green
State v. McCumber (2017)
Standing to challenge the constitutionality of a statute under the federal or state Constitution depends upon whether one is, or is about to be, adversely affected by the language in question, and to establish standing, the contestant must show that as a consequence of the alleged unconstitutionality, he or she is, or is about to be, deprived of a protected right. - 942 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 295 Nebraska R eports STATE v. McCUMBER Cite as 295 Neb. 941 7.
green
State v. Miller (2022)
See, also, State v. Eberly, 271 Neb. 893 , 716 N.W.2d 671 (2006). 20 See State v. McCumber, 295 Neb. 941 , 893 N.W.2d 411 (2017) (noting exigent circumstances may authorize warrantless blood test). - 30 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 312 Nebraska Reports STATE V.
noting exigent circumstances may authorize warrantless blood test
green
State v. Toland (2018)
See, also, State v. McCumber, 295 Neb. 941, 953-54 , 893 N.W.2d 411, 419 (2017) (“[w]ith the U.S. Supreme Court in Birchfield categorically finding that the exception of a warrantless search incident to a lawful arrest for drunk driving is unconstitutional in regard to a blood test, even under an implied consent law, we find § 60-6,197 is unconstitutional as applied to” the defendant).
green
State v. Jasa (2017)
See State v. McCumber, 295 Neb. 941 , 893 N.W.2d 411 (2017).