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 Vermont opinions name it 1 courts 1987–2019 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Vermont 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 |
|---|---|---|
Fraser v. Sleepergreen1 sentence2019See Fraser, 2007 VT 78 , 43 ¶ 11 (holding that provisions that “make an excuse or exception to the definition, particularly those principally within the knowledge of the defendant, are defenses”). | 1 | 1 |
Oliver v. United Statesgreen2 sentences1992In Oliver v. United States, 466 U.S. 170, 179 (1984), the Court held that a subjective expectation of privacy in lands outside the curtilage, so-called “open fields,” is objectively unreasonable. 1992In Oliver v. United States, 466 U.S. 170, 179 , 104 S.Ct. 1735, 1741 , 80 L.Ed.2d 214 (1984), the Court held that a subjective expectation of privacy in lands outside the curtilage, so-called "open fields," is objectively unreasonable. | 1 | 1 |
Florida v. Rileygreen2 sentences1991See, e.g., Florida v. Riley, 488 U.S. 445, 450-51 (1989). 1991See, e.g., Florida v. Riley, 488 U.S. 445, 450-51 , 109 S.Ct. 693, 696 , 102 L.Ed.2d 835 (1989). | 1 | 1 |
Mancusi v. DeFortegreen2 sentences1987Thus, in Alderman, 394 U.S. at 171 , it was held that only a defendant whose conversations were improperly overheard could rely on the protection of the Fourth Amendment, while co-conspirators or co-defendants could not vicariously invoke that defendant’s interest, and in Jeffers, 342 U.S. at 50-52 , it was determined that the accused was advancing his rights rather than those of his two aunts, in whose hotel room he was staying. 3 In Mancusi v. DeForte, 392 U.S. 364, 368 (1968), a reasonable expectation of privacy test for standing analysis was employed. 1987Nonetheless, the analysis still focused on the collateral inquiry of whether the defendant had “personal standing,” id. at 367 , to challenge an unlawful search of the offices of the union for which he was an officer. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Vermont. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. McCaffrey
green
1 sentence2019V.R.Cr.P. 12(d)(2) (requiring that, on motion to dismiss for lack of prima facie case, State show “it has substantial, admissible evidence as to the elements of the offense challenged by the defendant’s motion”); McCaffrey, 69 Vt. at 90 , 37 A. at 235-36 (noting statutory “exceptions must be negatived” by State “where they are descriptive of the offense, or define it”). ¶ 104. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Blow
green
2 sentences1991Rather, we stated our task under Article 11 is to “identify the values that are at risk, and vest the reasonable-expectation-of-privacy test with those values.” Id. at 518 , 602 A.2d at 556 . 1991Rather, we stated our task under Article 11 is to “identify the values that are at risk, and vest the reasonable-expectation-of-privacy test with those values.” Id. at 518 , 602 A.2d at 556 . | 1 | 1991–1991 |
United States v. Jeffers
green
1 sentence1987Thus, in Alderman, 394 U.S. at 171 , it was held that only a defendant whose conversations were improperly overheard could rely on the protection of the Fourth Amendment, while co-conspirators or co-defendants could not vicariously invoke that defendant’s interest, and in Jeffers, 342 U.S. at 50-52 , it was determined that the accused was advancing his rights rather than those of his two aunts, in whose hotel room he was staying. 3 In Mancusi v. DeForte, 392 U.S. 364, 368 (1968), a reasonable expectation of privacy test for standing analysis was employed. | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Alderman v. United States
green
1 sentence1987Thus, in Alderman, 394 U.S. at 171 , it was held that only a defendant whose conversations were improperly overheard could rely on the protection of the Fourth Amendment, while co-conspirators or co-defendants could not vicariously invoke that defendant’s interest, and in Jeffers, 342 U.S. at 50-52 , it was determined that the accused was advancing his rights rather than those of his two aunts, in whose hotel room he was staying. 3 In Mancusi v. DeForte, 392 U.S. 364, 368 (1968), a reasonable expectation of privacy test for standing analysis was employed. | 1 | 1987–1987 |
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.