facts against an objective standard (Idaho) · Go Syfert
← Idaho issues

facts against an objective standard in Idaho

32 Idaho opinions name it 2 courts 1996–2026 17 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Idaho 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.

Followed or applied (3)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Hobsongreen
idaho · 1974 · cited in 3 Idaho opinions naming this issue, 1996–2021
2 sentences

2021That is, “would the facts available to the officer at the moment of the seizure or search ‘warrant a [person] of reasonable caution in the belief’ that the action taken was appropriate.” State v. Hobson, 95 Idaho 920, 925 , 523 P.2d 523, 528 (1974) (quoting Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 22 , 88 S.Ct. 1868, 1880 , 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968)).

2021That is, “would the facts available to the officer at the moment of the seizure or search ‘warrant a [person] of reasonable caution in the belief’ that the action taken was appropriate.” State v. Hobson, 95 Idaho 920, 925 , 523 P.2d 523, 528 (1974) (quoting Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 22 , 88 S.Ct. 1868, 1880 , 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968)).

33
Terry v. Ohiogreen
scotus · 1968 · cited in 3 Idaho opinions naming this issue, 1996–2021
2 sentences

2021That is, “would the facts available to the officer at the moment of the seizure or search ‘warrant a [person] of reasonable caution in the belief’ that the action taken was appropriate.” State v. Hobson, 95 Idaho 920, 925 , 523 P.2d 523, 528 (1974) (quoting Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 22 , 88 S.Ct. 1868, 1880 , 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968)).

2021That is, “would the facts available to the officer at the moment of the seizure or search ‘warrant a [person] of reasonable caution in the belief’ that the action taken was appropriate.” State v. Hobson, 95 Idaho 920, 925 , 523 P.2d 523, 528 (1974) (quoting Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 22 , 88 S.Ct. 1868, 1880 , 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968)).

13
Brinegar v. United Statesgreen
scotus · 1949 · cited in 1 Idaho opinions naming this issue, 2025–2025
1 sentence

2025Brinegar v. United States, 338 U.S. 160, 175 (1949); Williams, 162 Idaho at 66 , 394 P.3d at 109 . 10 When reviewing an officer’s actions, the court must judge the facts against an objective standard.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Idaho. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (3)

CaseCitedYears
State v. Julian green
idaho · 1996
2 sentences

2021Julian, 129 Idaho at 136 , 922 P.2d at 1062 .

2021Julian, 129 Idaho at 136 , 922 P.2d at 1062 .

172007–2021
State v. Chad Lee Williams green
idahoctapp · 2016
2 sentences

2025Brinegar v. United States, 338 U.S. 160, 175 (1949); Williams, 162 Idaho at 66 , 394 P.3d at 109 . 10 When reviewing an officer’s actions, the court must judge the facts against an objective standard.

2025Brinegar v. United States, 338 U.S. 160, 175 (1949); Williams, 162 Idaho at 66 , 394 P.3d at 109 . 10 When reviewing an officer’s actions, the court must judge the facts against an objective standard.

102024–2026
Miranda v. Arizona green
scotus · 1966
2 sentences

2021In discussing the probable cause inquiry, we noted: 2 Nor does it appear that any person in Idaho, aside from Clark, has appealed a conviction under the felony enhancement of unlawful entry since it was added to Idaho Code section 18-7034 in 2017. 3 Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). 8 When reviewing an officer’s actions the court must judge the facts against an objective standard.

2021In discussing the probable cause inquiry, we noted: 2 Nor does it appear that any person in Idaho, aside from Clark, has appealed a conviction under the felony enhancement of unlawful entry since it was added to Idaho Code section 18-7034 in 2017. 3 Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). 8 When reviewing an officer’s actions the court must judge the facts against an objective standard.

22021–2021

Statutes the citing opinions construe

ID § Idaho Code § 19-2514 (7) ID § Idaho Code § 19-603 (7) ID § Idaho Code § 18-705 (3)

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.

Where else courts name it

ID 32 (1996–2026) IA 4 (2002–2021) OH 2 (2008–2018)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check