12 Idaho opinions name it 2 courts 1992–2012 0 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. Calegargreen2 sentences1995Although the Belton rule has been applied in Idaho cases where the police initiated contact with or arrested the defendant while the defendant was within the later-searched automobile, e.g., State v. Wheaton, 121 Idaho 404 , 825 P.2d 501 (1992); Smith, 120 Idaho 77, 80 , 813 P.2d 888, 891 (1991); State v. Calegar, 104 Idaho 526, 530 , 661 P.2d 311, 315 (1983); McIntee, 124 Idaho at 805 , 864 P.2d at 643 , our appellate courts have not previously been required to address the issue now posed — the extent to which Belton’s approval of passenger compartment searches incident to arrest may apply wh 1995Although the Belton rule has been applied in Idaho cases where the police initiated contact with or arrested the defendant while the defendant was within the later-searched automobile, e.g., State v. Wheaton, 121 Idaho 404 , 825 P.2d 501 (1992); Smith, 120 Idaho 77, 80 , 813 P.2d 888, 891 (1991); State v. Calegar, 104 Idaho 526, 530 , 661 P.2d 311, 315 (1983); McIntee, 124 Idaho at 805 , 864 P.2d at 643 , our appellate courts have not previously been required to address the issue now posed — the extent to which Belton’s approval of passenger compartment searches incident to arrest may apply wh | 3 | 4 |
New York v. Beltonred2 sentences2002See New York v. Belton, 453 U.S. 454 , 101 S.Ct. 2860 , 69 L.Ed.2d 768 (1981); State v. Charpentier, 131 Idaho 649 , 962 P.2d 1033 (1998). 2002See New York v. Belton, 453 U.S. 454 , 101 S.Ct. 2860 , 69 L.Ed.2d 768 (1981); State v. Charpentier, 131 Idaho 649 , 962 P.2d 1033 (1998). | 1 | 3 |
State v. Champagnegreen2 sentences2012Champagne, 137 Idaho at 680 , 52 P.3d at 324 . 2012Champagne, 137 Idaho at 680 , 52 P.3d at 324 . | 1 | 2 |
State v. Smithgreen2 sentences1995Although the Belton rule has been applied in Idaho cases where the police initiated contact with or arrested the defendant while the defendant was within the later-searched automobile, e.g., State v. Wheaton, 121 Idaho 404 , 825 P.2d 501 (1992); Smith, 120 Idaho 77, 80 , 813 P.2d 888, 891 (1991); State v. Calegar, 104 Idaho 526, 530 , 661 P.2d 311, 315 (1983); McIntee, 124 Idaho at 805 , 864 P.2d at 643 , our appellate courts have not previously been required to address the issue now posed — the extent to which Belton’s approval of passenger compartment searches incident to arrest may apply wh 1995Although the Belton rule has been applied in Idaho cases where the police initiated contact with or arrested the defendant while the defendant was within the later-searched automobile, e.g., State v. Wheaton, 121 Idaho 404 , 825 P.2d 501 (1992); Smith, 120 Idaho 77, 80 , 813 P.2d 888, 891 (1991); State v. Calegar, 104 Idaho 526, 530 , 661 P.2d 311, 315 (1983); McIntee, 124 Idaho at 805 , 864 P.2d at 643 , our appellate courts have not previously been required to address the issue now posed — the extent to which Belton’s approval of passenger compartment searches incident to arrest may apply wh | 1 | 2 |
State v. Hollandgreen2 sentences2005Watts asks the Court to overrule Charpentier and State v. Holland, 135 Idaho 159, 161 , 15 P.3d 1167, 1169 (2000), relying on the dissenting opinion in Charpentier and concurring opinions of Thornton v. United States, 541 U.S. 615 , 124 S.Ct. 2127 , 158 L.Ed.2d 905 (2004), all of which state that Belton should be limited. “[T]he rule of stare decisis dictates that we follow [controlling precedent], unless it is manifestly wrong, unless it has proven over time to be unjust or unwise, or unless overruling it is necessary to vindicate plain, obvious principles of law and remedy continued injustic 2005Watts asks the Court to overrule Charpentier and State v. Holland, 135 Idaho 159, 161 , 15 P.3d 1167, 1169 (2000), relying on the dissenting opinion in Charpentier and concurring opinions of Thornton v. United States, 541 U.S. 615 , 124 S.Ct. 2127 , 158 L.Ed.2d 905 (2004), all of which state that Belton should be limited. “[T]he rule of stare decisis dictates that we follow [controlling precedent], unless it is manifestly wrong, unless it has proven over time to be unjust or unwise, or unless overruling it is necessary to vindicate plain, obvious principles of law and remedy continued injustic | 1 | 1 |
State v. Brashiergreen2 sentences2004The conclusion of the Court in Foster is that “[b]ecause the Belton rule does not apply to the search of Foster’s vehicle, the search was valid only if it meets the Chimel ‘lunge area’ test.” 127 Idaho at 730, 905 P.2d at 1039 . 2004The conclusion of the Court in Foster is that “[b]ecause the Belton rule does not apply to the search of Foster’s vehicle, the search was valid only if it meets the Chimel ‘lunge area’ test.” 127 Idaho at 730, 905 P.2d at 1039 . | 1 | 1 |
Michigan v. Longgreen2 sentences2002Before Officer Benkula entered the vehicle to secure the weapons he knew to be there, as well as to search for those that he could reasonably believe were hidden inside, see Michigan v. Long, 463 U.S. 1032, 1049-50 , 103 S.Ct. 3469, 3480-81 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1201, 1219-21 (1983), 2 the convenience store clerk identified Diaz as looking like one of the robbers and Butcher and Diaz were arrested. 3 *132 The district court ruled that Butcher was lawfully arrested on an outstanding “daytime-only” misdemeanor warrant and for possession of a concealed weapon, thus justifying a search of the automobile un 2002Before Officer Benkula entered the vehicle to secure the weapons he knew to be there, as well as to search for those that he could reasonably believe were hidden inside, see Michigan v. Long, 463 U.S. 1032, 1049-50 , 103 S.Ct. 3469, 3480-81 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1201, 1219-21 (1983), 2 the convenience store clerk identified Diaz as looking like one of the robbers and Butcher and Diaz were arrested. 3 *132 The district court ruled that Butcher was lawfully arrested on an outstanding “daytime-only” misdemeanor warrant and for possession of a concealed weapon, thus justifying a search of the automobile un | 1 | 1 |
State v. Shepherdgreen2 sentences2001New York v. Belton, 453 U.S. 454 , 101 S.Ct. 2860 , 69 L.Ed.2d 768 (1981); State v. Charpentier, 131 Idaho 649 , 962 P.2d 1033 (1998); State v. Shepherd, 118 Idaho 121, 122-23 , 795 P.2d 15, 16-17 (Ct.App.1990). [3] This Court has not been asked to address whether Bowes could have made a good faith mistake of law in concluding that the "M-800" firecracker was an illegal firework. 2001New York v. Belton, 453 U.S. 454 , 101 S.Ct. 2860 , 69 L.Ed.2d 768 (1981); State v. Charpentier, 131 Idaho 649 , 962 P.2d 1033 (1998); State v. Shepherd, 118 Idaho 121, 122-23 , 795 P.2d 15, 16-17 (Ct.App.1990). [3] This Court has not been asked to address whether Bowes could have made a good faith mistake of law in concluding that the "M-800" firecracker was an illegal firework. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Idaho. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Charpentier
green
2 sentences2005This Court held that the Belton rule is the proper interpretation of protections provided by Article I, § 17 of the Idaho Constitution, stating that, “There is nothing in our history or jurisprudence that indicates a contrary result should be reached.” Id. at 653, 962 P.2d at 1037 . 2005This Court held that the Belton rule is the proper interpretation of protections provided by Article I, § 17 of the Idaho Constitution, stating that, “There is nothing in our history or jurisprudence that indicates a contrary result should be reached.” Id. at 653, 962 P.2d at 1037 . | 3 | 2001–2005 |
State v. Harris
green
2 sentences2012However, Idaho appellate court holdings predating Gant indicate otherwise. 5 In State v. Harris, 130 Idaho 444 , 942 P.2d 568 (Ct. App. 1997), this Court addressed the propriety of a search incident to arrest where the arrestee was apprehended outside his vehicle. 2012However, Idaho appellate court holdings predating Gant indicate otherwise. 5 In State v. Harris, 130 Idaho 444 , 942 P.2d 568 (Ct. App. 1997), this Court addressed the propriety of a search incident to arrest where the arrestee was apprehended outside his vehicle. | 2 | 2004–2012 |
Thornton v. United States
green
2 sentences2010Thornton, 541 U.S. at 617 , 124 S.Ct. at 2129 , 158 L.Ed.2d at 910-11 . 2010Thornton, 541 U.S. at 617 , 124 S.Ct. at 2129 , 158 L.Ed.2d at 910-11 . | 2 | 2005–2010 |
Reyes v. Kit Manufacturing Co.
green
2 sentences2005Watts has *233 failed to set forth arguments to demonstrate that Charpentier is “manifestly wrong ... has proven over time to be unjust or unwise, or [that] ... overruling it is necessary to vindicate plain, obvious principles of law and remedy continued injustice,” as required by Reyes, 131 Idaho at 240 , 953 P.2d at 990 , to justify not conforming with controlling precedent. 2005Watts has *233 failed to set forth arguments to demonstrate that Charpentier is “manifestly wrong ... has proven over time to be unjust or unwise, or [that] ... overruling it is necessary to vindicate plain, obvious principles of law and remedy continued injustice,” as required by Reyes, 131 Idaho at 240 , 953 P.2d at 990 , to justify not conforming with controlling precedent. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
State v. Newsom
green
2 sentences2005Newsom, 132 Idaho at 698-99 , 979 P.2d at 100-01 . 2005Newsom, 132 Idaho at 698-99 , 979 P.2d at 100-01 . | 1 | 2005–2005 |
State v. Foster
green
2 sentences2004The conclusion of the Court in Foster is that “[b]ecause the Belton rule does not apply to the search of Foster’s vehicle, the search was valid only if it meets the Chimel ‘lunge area’ test.” 127 Idaho at 730, 905 P.2d at 1039 . 2004The conclusion of the Court in Foster is that “[b]ecause the Belton rule does not apply to the search of Foster’s vehicle, the search was valid only if it meets the Chimel ‘lunge area’ test.” 127 Idaho at 730, 905 P.2d at 1039 . | 1 | 2004–2004 |
State v. Myers
green
2 sentences1998In State v. Myers, 36 Idaho 396 , 211 P. 440 (1922), the Court succinctly stated this scope: [I]f the arrest was lawful, and if the papers in question were taken at the time of the arrest ... and were instrumentalities through which the crime charged against appellants were in part consummated, the seizure was not violative of the provisions of our Constitution, the search being justifiable as an incident to the lawful arrest. 1998In State v. Myers, 36 Idaho 396 , 211 P. 440 (1922), the Court succinctly stated this scope: [I]f the arrest was lawful, and if the papers in question were taken at the time of the arrest ... and were instrumentalities through which the crime charged against appellants were in part consummated, the seizure was not violative of the provisions of our Constitution, the search being justifiable as an incident to the lawful arrest. | 1 | 1998–1998 |
State v. McIntee
green
2 sentences1995Although the Belton rule has been applied in Idaho cases where the police initiated contact with or arrested the defendant while the defendant was within the later-searched automobile, e.g., State v. Wheaton, 121 Idaho 404 , 825 P.2d 501 (1992); Smith, 120 Idaho 77, 80 , 813 P.2d 888, 891 (1991); State v. Calegar, 104 Idaho 526, 530 , 661 P.2d 311, 315 (1983); McIntee, 124 Idaho at 805 , 864 P.2d at 643 , our appellate courts have not previously been required to address the issue now posed — the extent to which Belton’s approval of passenger compartment searches incident to arrest may apply wh 1995Although the Belton rule has been applied in Idaho cases where the police initiated contact with or arrested the defendant while the defendant was within the later-searched automobile, e.g., State v. Wheaton, 121 Idaho 404 , 825 P.2d 501 (1992); Smith, 120 Idaho 77, 80 , 813 P.2d 888, 891 (1991); State v. Calegar, 104 Idaho 526, 530 , 661 P.2d 311, 315 (1983); McIntee, 124 Idaho at 805 , 864 P.2d at 643 , our appellate courts have not previously been required to address the issue now posed — the extent to which Belton’s approval of passenger compartment searches incident to arrest may apply wh | 1 | 1995–1995 |
State v. Wheaton
green
2 sentences1995Although the Belton rule has been applied in Idaho cases where the police initiated contact with or arrested the defendant while the defendant was within the later-searched automobile, e.g., State v. Wheaton, 121 Idaho 404 , 825 P.2d 501 (1992); Smith, 120 Idaho 77, 80 , 813 P.2d 888, 891 (1991); State v. Calegar, 104 Idaho 526, 530 , 661 P.2d 311, 315 (1983); McIntee, 124 Idaho at 805 , 864 P.2d at 643 , our appellate courts have not previously been required to address the issue now posed — the extent to which Belton’s approval of passenger compartment searches incident to arrest may apply wh 1995Although the Belton rule has been applied in Idaho cases where the police initiated contact with or arrested the defendant while the defendant was within the later-searched automobile, e.g., State v. Wheaton, 121 Idaho 404 , 825 P.2d 501 (1992); Smith, 120 Idaho 77, 80 , 813 P.2d 888, 891 (1991); State v. Calegar, 104 Idaho 526, 530 , 661 P.2d 311, 315 (1983); McIntee, 124 Idaho at 805 , 864 P.2d at 643 , our appellate courts have not previously been required to address the issue now posed — the extent to which Belton’s approval of passenger compartment searches incident to arrest may apply wh | 1 | 1995–1995 |
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.