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.
13 Idaho opinions name it 2 courts 1985–2026 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Guzmangreen2 sentences2026See Guzman, 122 Idaho at 984 , 842 P.2d at 663 (holding that trial court correctly concluded that there was no probable cause under the “totality of the circumstances” after rejecting a Franks challenge). 2026See Guzman, 122 Idaho at 984 , 842 P.2d at 663 (holding that trial court correctly concluded that there was no probable cause under the “totality of the circumstances” after rejecting a Franks challenge). | 5 | 6 |
State v. Kaygreen2 sentences2025State v. Kay, 129 Idaho 507, 511 , 927 P.2d 897, 901 (Ct. App. 1996). 2025State v. Kay, 129 Idaho 507, 511 , 927 P.2d 897, 901 (Ct. App. 1996). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Rounsvillegreen2 sentences2013State v. Guzman, 122 Idaho 981, 983-84 , 842 P.2d 660, 662-63 (1992); State v. Rounsville, 136 Idaho 869, 871 , 42 P.3d 100, 103 (Ct. App. 2002). 2013State v. Guzman, 122 Idaho 981, 983-84 , 842 P.2d 660, 662-63 (1992); State v. Rounsville, 136 Idaho 869, 871 , 42 P.3d 100, 103 (Ct. App. 2002). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Beatygreen2 sentences2002State *872 v. Guzman, 122 Idaho 981, 983-84 , 842 P.2d 660, 662-63 (1992); State v. Peterson, 133 Idaho 44, 47 , 981 P.2d 1154, 1157 (Ct.App.1999); State v. Kay, 129 Idaho 507, 511 , 927 P.2d 897, 901 (Ct.App.1996); State v. Beaty, 118 Idaho 20, 24-26 , 794 P.2d 290, 294-96 (Ct.App.1990). 2002State *872 v. Guzman, 122 Idaho 981, 983-84 , 842 P.2d 660, 662-63 (1992); State v. Peterson, 133 Idaho 44, 47 , 981 P.2d 1154, 1157 (Ct.App.1999); State v. Kay, 129 Idaho 507, 511 , 927 P.2d 897, 901 (Ct.App.1996); State v. Beaty, 118 Idaho 20, 24-26 , 794 P.2d 290, 294-96 (Ct.App.1990). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Fishergreen2 sentences2025“To justify a Franks hearing, false testimony must be made deliberately or recklessly by a governmental affiant, not by a nongovernmental informant.” State v. Fisher, 140 Idaho 365, 370 , 93 P.3d 696, 701 (2004) (citing Franks, 438 U.S. at 171 ). 2025“To justify a Franks hearing, false testimony must be made deliberately or recklessly by a governmental affiant, not by a nongovernmental informant.” State v. Fisher, 140 Idaho 365, 370 , 93 P.3d 696, 701 (2004) (citing Franks, 438 U.S. at 171 ). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Avelargreen2 sentences2004“If a district court reaches the correct result by an erroneous theory, this Court will affirm the order upon the correct theory.” McKinney v. State, 133 Idaho 695, 700 , 992 P.2d 144, 149 (1999) (citing State v. Avelar, 129 Idaho 700, 704 , 931 P.2d 1218, 1222 (1997)). 2004“If a district court reaches the correct result by an erroneous theory, this Court will affirm the order upon the correct theory.” McKinney v. State, 133 Idaho 695, 700 , 992 P.2d 144, 149 (1999) (citing State v. Avelar, 129 Idaho 700, 704 , 931 P.2d 1218, 1222 (1997)). | 1 | 1 |
McKinney v. Stategreen2 sentences2004“If a district court reaches the correct result by an erroneous theory, this Court will affirm the order upon the correct theory.” McKinney v. State, 133 Idaho 695, 700 , 992 P.2d 144, 149 (1999) (citing State v. Avelar, 129 Idaho 700, 704 , 931 P.2d 1218, 1222 (1997)). 2004“If a district court reaches the correct result by an erroneous theory, this Court will affirm the order upon the correct theory.” McKinney v. State, 133 Idaho 695, 700 , 992 P.2d 144, 149 (1999) (citing State v. Avelar, 129 Idaho 700, 704 , 931 P.2d 1218, 1222 (1997)). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Petersongreen2 sentences2002State *872 v. Guzman, 122 Idaho 981, 983-84 , 842 P.2d 660, 662-63 (1992); State v. Peterson, 133 Idaho 44, 47 , 981 P.2d 1154, 1157 (Ct.App.1999); State v. Kay, 129 Idaho 507, 511 , 927 P.2d 897, 901 (Ct.App.1996); State v. Beaty, 118 Idaho 20, 24-26 , 794 P.2d 290, 294-96 (Ct.App.1990). 2002State *872 v. Guzman, 122 Idaho 981, 983-84 , 842 P.2d 660, 662-63 (1992); State v. Peterson, 133 Idaho 44, 47 , 981 P.2d 1154, 1157 (Ct.App.1999); State v. Kay, 129 Idaho 507, 511 , 927 P.2d 897, 901 (Ct.App.1996); State v. Beaty, 118 Idaho 20, 24-26 , 794 P.2d 290, 294-96 (Ct.App.1990). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Jardinegreen2 sentences1996Guzman, 122 Idaho at 983-84 , 842 P.2d at 662-63 ; Sorbel, 124 Idaho at 279-80 , 858 P.2d at 818-19 ; State v. Beaty, 118 Idaho 20, 24-26 , 794 P.2d 290, 294-96 (Ct.App.1990); State v. Jardine, 118 Idaho 288, 291-93 , 796 P.2d 165, 168-70 (Ct.App.1990). 1996Guzman, 122 Idaho at 983-84 , 842 P.2d at 662-63 ; Sorbel, 124 Idaho at 279-80 , 858 P.2d at 818-19 ; State v. Beaty, 118 Idaho 20, 24-26 , 794 P.2d 290, 294-96 (Ct.App.1990); State v. Jardine, 118 Idaho 288, 291-93 , 796 P.2d 165, 168-70 (Ct.App.1990). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Peightalgreen2 sentences1993Here, Kluss presented a Franks issue to the district court and after two hearings the court made written findings and conclusions, deciding that there was no Franks problem which would invalidate the search warrant. *22 In Peightal , our Supreme Court noted the standard of review to be applied in reviewing the trial court’s decision denying a defendant’s motion to suppress constitutionally challenged evidence. “[W]e will overturn the trial court’s factual findings only if they are clearly erroneous ... while we agree that we should freely review whether the trial court correctly applied the la 1993Here, Kluss presented a Franks issue to the district court and after two hearings the court made written findings and conclusions, deciding that there was no Franks problem which would invalidate the search warrant. *22 In Peightal , our Supreme Court noted the standard of review to be applied in reviewing the trial court’s decision denying a defendant’s motion to suppress constitutionally challenged evidence. “[W]e will overturn the trial court’s factual findings only if they are clearly erroneous ... while we agree that we should freely review whether the trial court correctly applied the la | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Idaho. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Franks v. Delaware
green
2 sentences2025However, a defendant may be entitled to a hearing, known as a Franks hearing, at which additional evidence about the warrant’s validity may be presented if he can make “a substantial preliminary showing that a false statement 9 knowingly and intentionally, or with reckless disregard for the truth, was included by the affiant in the warrant affidavit, and [that] the allegedly false statement is necessary to the finding of probable cause . . . .” Franks, 438 U.S. at 155-156 . 2025However, a defendant may be entitled to a hearing, known as a Franks hearing, at which additional evidence about the warrant’s validity may be presented if he can make “a substantial preliminary showing that a false statement 9 knowingly and intentionally, or with reckless disregard for the truth, was included by the affiant in the warrant affidavit, and [that] the allegedly false statement is necessary to the finding of probable cause . . . .” Franks, 438 U.S. at 155-156 . | 4 | 1985–2025 |
State v. Ruess
green
2 sentences2004Id. 2004Id. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
State v. Sorbel
green
2 sentences1996Guzman, 122 Idaho at 983-84 , 842 P.2d at 662-63 ; Sorbel, 124 Idaho at 279-80 , 858 P.2d at 818-19 ; State v. Beaty, 118 Idaho 20, 24-26 , 794 P.2d 290, 294-96 (Ct.App.1990); State v. Jardine, 118 Idaho 288, 291-93 , 796 P.2d 165, 168-70 (Ct.App.1990). 1996Guzman, 122 Idaho at 983-84 , 842 P.2d at 662-63 ; Sorbel, 124 Idaho at 279-80 , 858 P.2d at 818-19 ; State v. Beaty, 118 Idaho 20, 24-26 , 794 P.2d 290, 294-96 (Ct.App.1990); State v. Jardine, 118 Idaho 288, 291-93 , 796 P.2d 165, 168-70 (Ct.App.1990). | 1 | 1996–1996 |
State v. Prestwich
green
2 sentences1990Franks v. Delaware, supra; State v. Lindner, supra. 2 . 115 Idaho 317 , 766 P.2d 787 (Ct.App.1988), aff’d on review, 116 Idaho 959 , 783 P.2d 298 (1989). 3 . 1990Franks v. Delaware, supra; State v. Lindner, supra. 2 . 115 Idaho 317 , 766 P.2d 787 (Ct.App.1988), aff’d on review, 116 Idaho 959 , 783 P.2d 298 (1989). 3 . | 1 | 1990–1990 |
State v. Lindner
green
2 sentences1990Franks, supra; State v. Lindner, 100 Idaho 37 , 592 P.2d 852 (1979). [1] In this case, however, we are not concerned with the inclusion of information in an affidavit; rather it is the omission of information which is alleged to have misled the magistrate. 1990Franks, supra; State v. Lindner, 100 Idaho 37 , 592 P.2d 852 (1979). [1] In this case, however, we are not concerned with the inclusion of information in an affidavit; rather it is the omission of information which is alleged to have misled the magistrate. | 1 | 1990–1990 |
State v. Prestwich
green
2 sentences1990Franks v. Delaware, supra; State v. Lindner, supra. 2 . 115 Idaho 317 , 766 P.2d 787 (Ct.App.1988), aff’d on review, 116 Idaho 959 , 783 P.2d 298 (1989). 3 . 1990Franks v. Delaware, supra; State v. Lindner, supra. 2 . 115 Idaho 317 , 766 P.2d 787 (Ct.App.1988), aff’d on review, 116 Idaho 959 , 783 P.2d 298 (1989). 3 . | 1 | 1990–1990 |
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.