14 Idaho opinions name it 2 courts 1994–2025 4 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Bradbury v. Idaho Judicial Councilgreen2 sentences2025See Bradbury, 136 Idaho at 73 , 28 P.3d at 1016 (holding that “[o]nly after a court finds a liberty or property interest will it reach the next step of analysis in which it determines what process is due”). 2025See Bradbury, 136 Idaho at 73 , 28 P.3d at 1016 (holding that “[o]nly after a court finds a liberty or property interest will it reach the next step of analysis in which it determines what process is due”). | 2 | 8 |
Schevers v. Stategreen2 sentences2012Additionally, this Court has held that “only after a court finds a liberty or property interest will it reach the next step of analysis, in which it determines what process is due.” Maresh, 132 Idaho at 226 , 970 P.2d at 19 (citing Schevers v. State, 129 Idaho 573, 575 , 930 P.2d 603, 605 (1996)). 2012Additionally, this Court has held that “only after a court finds a liberty or property interest will it reach the next step of analysis, in which it determines what process is due.” Maresh, 132 Idaho at 226 , 970 P.2d at 19 (citing Schevers v. State, 129 Idaho 573, 575 , 930 P.2d 603, 605 (1996)). | 2 | 3 |
Maresh v. State, Department of Health & Welfare Ex Rel. Caballerogreen2 sentences2012Additionally, this Court has held that “only after a court finds a liberty or property interest will it reach the next step of analysis, in which it determines what process is due.” Maresh, 132 Idaho at 226 , 970 P.2d at 19 (citing Schevers v. State, 129 Idaho 573, 575 , 930 P.2d 603, 605 (1996)). 2012Additionally, this Court has held that “only after a court finds a liberty or property interest will it reach the next step of analysis, in which it determines what process is due.” Maresh, 132 Idaho at 226 , 970 P.2d at 19 (citing Schevers v. State, 129 Idaho 573, 575 , 930 P.2d 603, 605 (1996)). | 1 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Idaho. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Fuller
green
1 sentence2019Id. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth
green
2 sentences2012And that “the requirements of procedural due process apply only to the deprivation of interest encompassed by the Fourteenth Amendment’s protection of liberty and property.” Id. (quoting Roth, 408 U.S. at 569 , 92 S.Ct. at 2705 , 33 L.Ed.2d at 556 ). 2012And that “the requirements of procedural due process apply only to the deprivation of interest encompassed by the Fourteenth Amendment’s protection of liberty and property.” Id. (quoting Roth, 408 U.S. at 569 , 92 S.Ct. at 2705 , 33 L.Ed.2d at 556 ). | 1 | 2012–2012 |
State v. Hairston
green
2 sentences2008Hair *446 ston, 133 Idaho at 501 , 988 P.2d at 1175 . “ ‘Relevant Evidence’ means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.” I.R.E. 401. 2008Hair *446 ston, 133 Idaho at 501 , 988 P.2d at 1175 . “ ‘Relevant Evidence’ means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.” I.R.E. 401. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Terry v. Ohio
green
2 sentences1994Since Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 , 88 S.Ct. 1868 , 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968), the United States Supreme Court has further defined the boundaries of an investigatory stop, determining that once the stop has occurred: the officer may ask the detainee a moderate number of questions to determine his identity and to try to obtain information confirming or dispelling the officer’s suspicions. 1994Since Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 , 88 S.Ct. 1868 , 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968), the United States Supreme Court has further defined the boundaries of an investigatory stop, determining that once the stop has occurred: the officer may ask the detainee a moderate number of questions to determine his identity and to try to obtain information confirming or dispelling the officer’s suspicions. | 1 | 1994–1994 |
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.