19 Wyoming opinions name it 1 courts 2007–2026 7 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Wyoming 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 |
|---|---|---|
In the Interest of: DT and NT, Minor Children.<br /> ST v. Stategreen2 sentences2025“Plain error occurs when ‘1) the record is clear about the incident alleged as error; 2) there was a transgression of a clear and unequivocal rule of law; and 3) the party claiming the 9 error was denied a substantial right resulting in material prejudice.’” Int of BG, 2023 WY 40, ¶ 29 , 528 P.3d 402 , 412 (Wyo. 2023) (quoting Int. of DT, 2017 WY 36, ¶ 23 , 391 P.3d 1136, 1143 (Wyo. 2017)); see also Int. of JG, 742 P.2d 770, 775 (Wyo. 1987) (there must be “a ‘clear and unequivocal rule of law[] which [the] particular facts . . . transgress[] in a clear and obvious, not merely arguable way’”). 2025“Plain error occurs when ‘1) the record is clear about the incident alleged as error; 2) there was a transgression of a clear and unequivocal rule of law; and 3) the party claiming the 9 error was denied a substantial right resulting in material prejudice.’” Int of BG, 2023 WY 40, ¶ 29 , 528 P.3d 402 , 412 (Wyo. 2023) (quoting Int. of DT, 2017 WY 36, ¶ 23 , 391 P.3d 1136, 1143 (Wyo. 2017)); see also Int. of JG, 742 P.2d 770, 775 (Wyo. 1987) (there must be “a ‘clear and unequivocal rule of law[] which [the] particular facts . . . transgress[] in a clear and obvious, not merely arguable way’”). | 3 | 6 |
Andrew William Deedsgreen2 sentences2024Deeds v. State, 2014 WY 124, ¶ 21 , 335 P.3d 473, 479 (Wyo. 2014) (“The appellant bears the burden of proving plain error[.]”). 2024Deeds v. State, 2014 WY 124, ¶ 21 , 335 P.3d 473, 479 (Wyo. 2014) (“The appellant bears the burden of proving plain error[.]”). | 2 | 5 |
In Interest of JGgreen2 sentences2025“Plain error occurs when ‘1) the record is clear about the incident alleged as error; 2) there was a transgression of a clear and unequivocal rule of law; and 3) the party claiming the 9 error was denied a substantial right resulting in material prejudice.’” Int of BG, 2023 WY 40, ¶ 29 , 528 P.3d 402 , 412 (Wyo. 2023) (quoting Int. of DT, 2017 WY 36, ¶ 23 , 391 P.3d 1136, 1143 (Wyo. 2017)); see also Int. of JG, 742 P.2d 770, 775 (Wyo. 1987) (there must be “a ‘clear and unequivocal rule of law[] which [the] particular facts . . . transgress[] in a clear and obvious, not merely arguable way’”). 2024“Plain error occurs when ‘1) the record is clear about the incident alleged as error; 2) there was a transgression of a clear and unequivocal rule of law; and 3) the party claiming the error was denied a substantial right resulting in material prejudice.’” Int of BG, 2023 WY 40 ¶ 29 , 528 P.3d at 412 (quoting Int. of DT, 2017 WY 36, ¶ 23 , 391 P.3d at 1143 ); Int. of JG, 742 P.2d 770, 775 (Wyo. 1987) (there must be “a ‘clear and unequivocal rule of law[] which [the] particular facts…transgress[] in a clear and obvious, not merely arguable way’”) (quoting Jahnke v. State, 692 P.2d 911, 928 (Wyo | 2 | 2 |
Mercer v. Stategreen2 sentences2024Id. (citing Mercer v. State, 2012 WY 54, ¶ 8 , 273 P.3d 1100, 1102 (Wyo. 2012)). 2024Id. (citing Mercer v. State, 2012 WY 54, ¶ 8 , 273 P.3d 1100, 1102 (Wyo. 2012)). | 2 | 2 |
Christensen v. Stategreen2 sentences2014"The appellant bears the burden of proving plain error." Marquess, 2011 WY 95, ¶ 9 , 256 P.3d at 509 (quoting Christensen v. State, 2010 WY 95, ¶ 6 , 234 P.3d 1229, 1230 (Wyo.2010). [¶75] "It is well established in Wyoming that an expert witness cannot vouch for the truthfulness or credibility of an alleged victim." Seward v. State, 2003 WY 116, ¶ 19 , 76 P.3d 805, 814 (Wyo.2003) (quoting Zabel v. State, 765 P.2d 357, 360 (Wyo.1988)). "[Elxpert testimony that discusses the behavior and characteristics of sexual assault victims and the range of responses to sexual assault encountered by experts 2014"The appellant bears the burden of proving plain error." Marquess, 2011 WY 95, ¶ 9 , 256 P.3d at 509 (quoting Christensen v. State, 2010 WY 95, ¶ 6 , 234 P.3d 1229, 1230 (Wyo.2010). [¶75] "It is well established in Wyoming that an expert witness cannot vouch for the truthfulness or credibility of an alleged victim." Seward v. State, 2003 WY 116, ¶ 19 , 76 P.3d 805, 814 (Wyo.2003) (quoting Zabel v. State, 765 P.2d 357, 360 (Wyo.1988)). "[Elxpert testimony that discusses the behavior and characteristics of sexual assault victims and the range of responses to sexual assault encountered by experts | 2 | 2 |
Michael David Lott v. The State of Wyominggreen2 sentences2025“Failure to establish each element precludes a finding of plain error.” Lott v. State, 2022 WY 143, ¶ 10 , 519 P.3d 646 , 649 (Wyo. 2022) (quoting Klingbeil v. State, 2021 WY 89, ¶ 40 , 492 P.3d 279 , 288 (Wyo. 2021)). [¶24] The first element of the plain error is satisfied in this case. 2025“Failure to establish each element precludes a finding of plain error.” Lott v. State, 2022 WY 143, ¶ 10 , 519 P.3d 646 , 649 (Wyo. 2022) (quoting Klingbeil v. State, 2021 WY 89, ¶ 40 , 492 P.3d 279 , 288 (Wyo. 2021)). [¶24] The first element of the plain error is satisfied in this case. | 1 | 2 |
In the Interest of: BG, minor child, NG v. The State of Wyominggreen2 sentences2025“Plain error occurs when ‘1) the record is clear about the incident alleged as error; 2) there was a transgression of a clear and unequivocal rule of law; and 3) the party claiming the 9 error was denied a substantial right resulting in material prejudice.’” Int of BG, 2023 WY 40, ¶ 29 , 528 P.3d 402 , 412 (Wyo. 2023) (quoting Int. of DT, 2017 WY 36, ¶ 23 , 391 P.3d 1136, 1143 (Wyo. 2017)); see also Int. of JG, 742 P.2d 770, 775 (Wyo. 1987) (there must be “a ‘clear and unequivocal rule of law[] which [the] particular facts . . . transgress[] in a clear and obvious, not merely arguable way’”). 2025“Plain error occurs when ‘1) the record is clear about the incident alleged as error; 2) there was a transgression of a clear and unequivocal rule of law; and 3) the party claiming the 9 error was denied a substantial right resulting in material prejudice.’” Int of BG, 2023 WY 40, ¶ 29 , 528 P.3d 402 , 412 (Wyo. 2023) (quoting Int. of DT, 2017 WY 36, ¶ 23 , 391 P.3d 1136, 1143 (Wyo. 2017)); see also Int. of JG, 742 P.2d 770, 775 (Wyo. 1987) (there must be “a ‘clear and unequivocal rule of law[] which [the] particular facts . . . transgress[] in a clear and obvious, not merely arguable way’”). | 1 | 2 |
Dennis Karl Klingbeil v. The State of Wyominggreen2 sentences2025“Failure to establish each element precludes a finding of plain error.” Lott v. State, 2022 WY 143, ¶ 10 , 519 P.3d 646 , 649 (Wyo. 2022) (quoting Klingbeil v. State, 2021 WY 89, ¶ 40 , 492 P.3d 279 , 288 (Wyo. 2021)). [¶24] The first element of the plain error is satisfied in this case. 2025“Failure to establish each element precludes a finding of plain error.” Lott v. State, 2022 WY 143, ¶ 10 , 519 P.3d 646 , 649 (Wyo. 2022) (quoting Klingbeil v. State, 2021 WY 89, ¶ 40 , 492 P.3d 279 , 288 (Wyo. 2021)). [¶24] The first element of the plain error is satisfied in this case. | 1 | 2 |
In the Interest Of: SK, MK, SK, SK and WM, minor children, MK v. The State of Wyominggreen2 sentences2026In re SK, 2024 WY 25, ¶ 40 , 544 P.3d 606, 617 (Wyo. 2024). [¶16] The first element of the plain error test is satisfied because the record clearly shows the juvenile court did not afford Mother the opportunity to present opening or closing statements and did not initially invite her to cross-examine witnesses. 2026In re SK, 2024 WY 25, ¶ 40 , 544 P.3d 606, 617 (Wyo. 2024). [¶16] The first element of the plain error test is satisfied because the record clearly shows the juvenile court did not afford Mother the opportunity to present opening or closing statements and did not initially invite her to cross-examine witnesses. | 1 | 1 |
Larkins v. Stategreen1 sentence2024“Material prejudice exists when the appellant demonstrates a reasonable probability that the jury verdict would have been more favorable in the absence of the error.” Gutierrez, 2020 WY 150, ¶ 5 , 477 P.3d at 531 (citing Larkins v. State, 2018 WY 122 , ¶ 94, 429 P.3d 28, 49-50 (Wyo. 2018)). | 1 | 1 |
Vaughn v. Stategreen1 sentence2024“Plain error occurs when ‘1) the record is clear about the incident alleged as error; 2) there was a transgression of a clear and unequivocal rule of law; and 3) the party claiming the error was denied a substantial right resulting in material prejudice.’” Int of BG, 2023 WY 40 ¶ 29 , 528 P.3d at 412 (quoting Int. of DT, 2017 WY 36, ¶ 23 , 391 P.3d at 1143 ); Int. of JG, 742 P.2d 770, 775 (Wyo. 1987) (there must be “a ‘clear and unequivocal rule of law[] which [the] particular facts…transgress[] in a clear and obvious, not merely arguable way’”) (quoting Jahnke v. State, 692 P.2d 911, 928 (Wyo | 1 | 1 |
Jahnke v. Stategreen1 sentence2024“Plain error occurs when ‘1) the record is clear about the incident alleged as error; 2) there was a transgression of a clear and unequivocal rule of law; and 3) the party claiming the error was denied a substantial right resulting in material prejudice.’” Int of BG, 2023 WY 40 ¶ 29 , 528 P.3d at 412 (quoting Int. of DT, 2017 WY 36, ¶ 23 , 391 P.3d at 1143 ); Int. of JG, 742 P.2d 770, 775 (Wyo. 1987) (there must be “a ‘clear and unequivocal rule of law[] which [the] particular facts…transgress[] in a clear and obvious, not merely arguable way’”) (quoting Jahnke v. State, 692 P.2d 911, 928 (Wyo | 1 | 1 |
Joreski v. Stategreen2 sentences2014E.g., Joreski v. State, 2012 WY 143, ¶ 13 , 288 P.3d 413, 416 (Wyo.2012); Hackett v. State, 2010 WY 90, ¶ 14 , 233 P.3d 988, 992 (Wyo.2010). 2014E.g., Joreski v. State, 2012 WY 143, ¶ 13 , 288 P.3d 413, 416 (Wyo.2012); Hackett v. State, 2010 WY 90, ¶ 14 , 233 P.3d 988, 992 (Wyo.2010). | 1 | 1 |
Zabel v. Stategreen1 sentence2014"The appellant bears the burden of proving plain error." Marquess, 2011 WY 95, ¶ 9 , 256 P.3d at 509 (quoting Christensen v. State, 2010 WY 95, ¶ 6 , 234 P.3d 1229, 1230 (Wyo.2010). [¶75] "It is well established in Wyoming that an expert witness cannot vouch for the truthfulness or credibility of an alleged victim." Seward v. State, 2003 WY 116, ¶ 19 , 76 P.3d 805, 814 (Wyo.2003) (quoting Zabel v. State, 765 P.2d 357, 360 (Wyo.1988)). "[Elxpert testimony that discusses the behavior and characteristics of sexual assault victims and the range of responses to sexual assault encountered by experts | 1 | 1 |
Hackett v. Stategreen2 sentences2014E.g., Joreski v. State, 2012 WY 143, ¶ 13 , 288 P.3d 413, 416 (Wyo.2012); Hackett v. State, 2010 WY 90, ¶ 14 , 233 P.3d 988, 992 (Wyo.2010). 2014E.g., Joreski v. State, 2012 WY 143, ¶ 13 , 288 P.3d 413, 416 (Wyo.2012); Hackett v. State, 2010 WY 90, ¶ 14 , 233 P.3d 988, 992 (Wyo.2010). | 1 | 1 |
Seward v. Stategreen2 sentences2014"The appellant bears the burden of proving plain error." Marquess, 2011 WY 95, ¶ 9 , 256 P.3d at 509 (quoting Christensen v. State, 2010 WY 95, ¶ 6 , 234 P.3d 1229, 1230 (Wyo.2010). [¶75] "It is well established in Wyoming that an expert witness cannot vouch for the truthfulness or credibility of an alleged victim." Seward v. State, 2003 WY 116, ¶ 19 , 76 P.3d 805, 814 (Wyo.2003) (quoting Zabel v. State, 765 P.2d 357, 360 (Wyo.1988)). "[Elxpert testimony that discusses the behavior and characteristics of sexual assault victims and the range of responses to sexual assault encountered by experts 2014"The appellant bears the burden of proving plain error." Marquess, 2011 WY 95, ¶ 9 , 256 P.3d at 509 (quoting Christensen v. State, 2010 WY 95, ¶ 6 , 234 P.3d 1229, 1230 (Wyo.2010). [¶75] "It is well established in Wyoming that an expert witness cannot vouch for the truthfulness or credibility of an alleged victim." Seward v. State, 2003 WY 116, ¶ 19 , 76 P.3d 805, 814 (Wyo.2003) (quoting Zabel v. State, 765 P.2d 357, 360 (Wyo.1988)). "[Elxpert testimony that discusses the behavior and characteristics of sexual assault victims and the range of responses to sexual assault encountered by experts | 1 | 1 |
Rivera v. Stategreen2 sentences2014"The appellant bears the burden of proving plain error." Marquess, 2011 WY 95, ¶ 9 , 256 P.3d at 509 (quoting Christensen v. State, 2010 WY 95, ¶ 6 , 234 P.3d 1229, 1230 (Wyo.2010). [¶75] "It is well established in Wyoming that an expert witness cannot vouch for the truthfulness or credibility of an alleged victim." Seward v. State, 2003 WY 116, ¶ 19 , 76 P.3d 805, 814 (Wyo.2003) (quoting Zabel v. State, 765 P.2d 357, 360 (Wyo.1988)). "[Elxpert testimony that discusses the behavior and characteristics of sexual assault victims and the range of responses to sexual assault encountered by experts 2014This Court has reasoned that such testimony "assists the jury in understanding some of the aspects of the behavior of victims and, so long as there is no comment on the eredibility or truthfulness of the victims, it does not invade the province of the jury." Id. at ¶ 27, at 817 (quoting Rivera, 840 P.2d at 939 ). [¶76] On direct examination, Ms. Huylar testified that forensic interviews enable children to tell their story by asking non-leading, open-ended questions. | 1 | 1 |
Talley v. Stategreen2 sentences2008Talley v. State, 2007 WY 37, ¶ 9 , 153 P.3d 256, 260 (Wyo.2007). [¶15] The appellant contends that several statements made by the prosecutor during rebuttal closing argument violated two of her basic constitutional rights: that the prosecutor may not comment upon the defendant's exercise of her right to remain silent, and the prosecutor may not attempt to shift the burden of proof to the defendant. 2008Talley v. State, 2007 WY 37, ¶ 9 , 153 P.3d 256, 260 (Wyo.2007). [¶15] The appellant contends that several statements made by the prosecutor during rebuttal closing argument violated two of her basic constitutional rights: that the prosecutor may not comment upon the defendant's exercise of her right to remain silent, and the prosecutor may not attempt to shift the burden of proof to the defendant. | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Quentin T. Wiles, United States of America v. Patrick J. Schleibaumgreen1 sentence2007As the Court stated in United States v. Wiles, 102 F.3d 1043, 1055 (10th Cir.1996), one important difference is that the State has the burden of proving harmless error, while the defendant has the burden of proving plain error. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Wyoming. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In the Matter of the Termination of Parental Rights to AGS and AMLD, Minor Children. SAS
green
2 sentences2018"Plain error occurs when '1) the record is clear about the incident alleged as error; 2) there was a transgression of a clear and unequivocal rule of law; and 3) the party claiming the error was denied a substantial right resulting in material prejudice.' Deeds v. State , 2014 WY 124 , ¶ 21, 335 P.3d 473 , 479 (Wyo. 2014) (citations omitted). 'The appellant bears the burden of proving plain error[.]' Id. " ST, ¶ 23, 391 P.3d at 1143 (quoting In re AGS , 2014 WY 143 , ¶ 34, 337 P.3d 470 , 480 (Wyo. 2014) ). [¶27] The first part of the plain error test is satisfied in this case. 2018"Plain error occurs when '1) the record is clear about the incident alleged as error; 2) there was a transgression of a clear and unequivocal rule of law; and 3) the party claiming the error was denied a substantial right resulting in material prejudice.' Deeds v. State , 2014 WY 124 , ¶ 21, 335 P.3d 473 , 479 (Wyo. 2014) (citations omitted). 'The appellant bears the burden of proving plain error[.]' Id. " ST, ¶ 23, 391 P.3d at 1143 (quoting In re AGS , 2014 WY 143 , ¶ 34, 337 P.3d 470 , 480 (Wyo. 2014) ). [¶27] The first part of the plain error test is satisfied in this case. | 2 | 2017–2018 |
Fernando Gutierrez v. The State of Wyoming
green
2 sentences2024“Material prejudice exists when the appellant demonstrates a reasonable probability that the jury verdict would have been more favorable in the absence of the error.” Gutierrez, 2020 WY 150, ¶ 5 , 477 P.3d at 531 (citing Larkins v. State, 2018 WY 122 , ¶ 94, 429 P.3d 28, 49-50 (Wyo. 2018)). 2024“Material prejudice exists when the appellant demonstrates a reasonable probability that the jury verdict would have been more favorable in the absence of the error.” Gutierrez, 2020 WY 150, ¶ 5 , 477 P.3d at 531 (citing Larkins v. State, 2018 WY 122 , ¶ 94, 429 P.3d 28, 49-50 (Wyo. 2018)). | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Clifford Giles Springstead v. The State of Wyoming
green
1 sentence2024Id. (citing Mercer v. State, 2012 WY 54, ¶ 8 , 273 P.3d 1100, 1102 (Wyo. 2012)). | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Marquess v. State
green
2 sentences2014"The appellant bears the burden of proving plain error." Marquess, 2011 WY 95, ¶ 9 , 256 P.3d at 509 (quoting Christensen v. State, 2010 WY 95, ¶ 6 , 234 P.3d 1229, 1230 (Wyo.2010). [¶75] "It is well established in Wyoming that an expert witness cannot vouch for the truthfulness or credibility of an alleged victim." Seward v. State, 2003 WY 116, ¶ 19 , 76 P.3d 805, 814 (Wyo.2003) (quoting Zabel v. State, 765 P.2d 357, 360 (Wyo.1988)). "[Elxpert testimony that discusses the behavior and characteristics of sexual assault victims and the range of responses to sexual assault encountered by experts 2014"The appellant bears the burden of proving plain error." Marquess, 2011 WY 95, ¶ 9 , 256 P.3d at 509 (quoting Christensen v. State, 2010 WY 95, ¶ 6 , 234 P.3d 1229, 1230 (Wyo.2010). [¶75] "It is well established in Wyoming that an expert witness cannot vouch for the truthfulness or credibility of an alleged victim." Seward v. State, 2003 WY 116, ¶ 19 , 76 P.3d 805, 814 (Wyo.2003) (quoting Zabel v. State, 765 P.2d 357, 360 (Wyo.1988)). "[Elxpert testimony that discusses the behavior and characteristics of sexual assault victims and the range of responses to sexual assault encountered by experts | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Gilbert Ortiz, Jr. v. The State of Wyoming
green
2 sentences2014The appellant bears the burden of proving plain error, and "[rleversal as a result of prosecutorial misconduct is not warranted unless a reasonable probability exists that absent the error the defendant may have enjoyed a more favorable verdict." Ortiz 2014 WY 60, ¶ 104 , 326 P.3d at 903 . [122] Sentencing judges are given broad discretion to consider a wide range of factors about the defendant when imposing sentences. 2014The appellant bears the burden of proving plain error, and "[rleversal as a result of prosecutorial misconduct is not warranted unless a reasonable probability exists that absent the error the defendant may have enjoyed a more favorable verdict." Ortiz 2014 WY 60, ¶ 104 , 326 P.3d at 903 . [122] Sentencing judges are given broad discretion to consider a wide range of factors about the defendant when imposing sentences. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Sandy v. State
green
1 sentence2012Id. | 1 | 2012–2012 |
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.