Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Utah opinions name it 2 courts 2006–2017 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Utah courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Moagreen2 sentences2017See State v. Moa , 2012 UT 28 , ¶ 27, 282 P.3d 985 ("The doctrine of invited error ... can preclude even plain error review."). 2017See State v. Moa , 2012 UT 28 , ¶ 27, 282 P.3d 985 ("The doctrine of invited error ... can preclude even plain error review."). | 3 | 3 |
State v. Johnsongreen2 sentences2017Johnson , 2014 UT App 161 , ¶ 14 n.6, 330 P.3d 743 . 2017Johnson , 2014 UT App 161 , ¶ 14 n.6, 330 P.3d 743 . | 2 | 3 |
State v. Perduegreen2 sentences2017For this reason, the Robison exception—and its analysis of exceptions to preservation—applies to unpreserved and waived issues concerning errors in jury instructions. 24 Cite as: 2017 UT 70 Opinion of the Court erroneous. 17 Because submitting an erroneous jury instruction to the court is a quintessential example of invited error, see State v. Perdue, 813 P.2d 1201, 1205 (Utah Ct. App. 1991), we decline to conduct a plain error review. ¶59 The ineffective assistance of counsel exception also does not apply because Mr. Johnson never raised it in his supplemental brief to the court of appeals. 2017For this reason, the Robison exception—and its analysis of exceptions to preservation—applies to unpreserved and waived issues concerning errors in jury instructions. 24 Cite as: 2017 UT 70 Opinion of the Court erroneous. 17 Because submitting an erroneous jury instruction to the court is a quintessential example of invited error, see State v. Perdue, 813 P.2d 1201, 1205 (Utah Ct. App. 1991), we decline to conduct a plain error review. ¶59 The ineffective assistance of counsel exception also does not apply because Mr. Johnson never raised it in his supplemental brief to the court of appeals. | 2 | 2 |
State v. Robisongreen2 sentences2014The lead opinion, however, has convinced me that the significance of both the substantive error and the rare anomaly that brought it before us unnoticed and unremarked by either Johnson's trial and appellate counsel or by the trial court 13 clears the bar of Robison's standard-an "astonishingly erroneous but undetected ruling" that would "subject the losing party ... to a great and manifest injustice," 2006 UT 65, ¶ 23 , 147 P.3d 448 (internal quotation marks omitted)-in the context of an appeal where the undetected error rendered the issue actually presented to us not simply "harmless," but e 2014The lead opinion, however, has convinced me that the significance of both the substantive error and the rare anomaly that brought it before us unnoticed and unremarked by either Johnson's trial and appellate counsel or by the trial court 13 clears the bar of Robison's standard-an "astonishingly erroneous but undetected ruling" that would "subject the losing party ... to a great and manifest injustice," 2006 UT 65, ¶ 23 , 147 P.3d 448 (internal quotation marks omitted)-in the context of an appeal where the undetected error rendered the issue actually presented to us not simply "harmless," but e | 1 | 1 |
Howells, Inc. v. Nelsongreen1 sentence2006That determination mandated reversal under rule 11. ¶ 38 In finding that the statute required a "substantially contemporaneous exchange," the court of appeals relied upon logic from Howells, Inc. v. Nelson, 565 P.2d 1147, 1149 (Utah 1977). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Utah. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Johnson
neutral
2 sentences2017For this reason, the Robison exception—and its analysis of exceptions to preservation—applies to unpreserved and waived issues concerning errors in jury instructions. 24 Cite as: 2017 UT 70 Opinion of the Court erroneous. 17 Because submitting an erroneous jury instruction to the court is a quintessential example of invited error, see State v. Perdue, 813 P.2d 1201, 1205 (Utah Ct. App. 1991), we decline to conduct a plain error review. ¶59 The ineffective assistance of counsel exception also does not apply because Mr. Johnson never raised it in his supplemental brief to the court of appeals. 2017For this reason, the Robison exception—and its analysis of exceptions to preservation—applies to unpreserved and waived issues concerning errors in jury instructions. 24 Cite as: 2017 UT 70 Opinion of the Court erroneous. 17 Because submitting an erroneous jury instruction to the court is a quintessential example of invited error, see State v. Perdue, 813 P.2d 1201, 1205 (Utah Ct. App. 1991), we decline to conduct a plain error review. ¶59 The ineffective assistance of counsel exception also does not apply because Mr. Johnson never raised it in his supplemental brief to the court of appeals. | 2 | 2017–2017 |
State v. Holgate
green
2 sentences2014State v. Holgate, 2000 UT 74, ¶ 12 , 10 P.3d 346 . 2014State v. Holgate, 2000 UT 74, ¶ 12 , 10 P.3d 346 . | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.