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.
11 Iowa opinions name it 2 courts 1976–2021 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Iowa 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. Davisgreen2 sentences1997State v. Davis, 446 N.W.2d 785, 788 (Iowa 1989). 1996State v. Davis, 446 N.W.2d 785, 788 (Iowa 1989). | 5 | 5 |
State v. Countrymangreen2 sentences2020“We utilize a dual test in determining the admissibility of a defendant’s inculpatory statements over a [F]ifth [A]mendment challenge.” State v. Countryman, 572 N.W.2d 553, 557 (Iowa 1997). 2019See State v. Countryman, 572 N.W.2d 553, 557 (Iowa 1997) (“We utilize a dual test in determining the admissibility of a defendant’s inculpatory statements over a Fifth Amendment challenge. | 2 | 2 |
Miranda v. Arizonagreen2 sentences1996Since Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S,Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966), we have a dual test in determining the admissibility of inculpatory statements by a criminal defendant. 1996Since Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S,Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966), we have a dual test in determining the admissibility of inculpatory statements by a criminal defendant. | 1 | 3 |
United States v. Patrick Nolan McSwaingreen1 sentence2021To determine the reasonableness of the seizure, we must employ a dual inquiry: (1) was the officer’s conduct justified at its inception and (2) was the conduct “reasonably related in scope to the circumstances which justified the interference in the first place.” Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 , 19–20 (1968); see United States v. McSwain, 29 F.3d 558, 561 (10th Cir. 1994) (holding initially valid stop based on suspicion of registration violation evolved into unreasonable detention); but see Arizona v. Johnson, 555 U.S. 323, 333 (2009) (allowing questioning on matters unrelated to justification for | 1 | 1 |
Treasure Island Catering Co., Inc. v. State Board of Equalizationgreen2 sentences1991Accord, Treasure Island Catering Co., Inc. v. State Bd. of Equalization, 19 Cal.2d 181, 187 , 120 P.2d 1, 5 (1941) (one who merely prepares a sandwich for consumption without offering any facilities for its consumption on the premises and with intent that it be consumed elsewhere has not “served” a meal within the meaning of retail sales tax act). 1991Accord, Treasure Island Catering Co., Inc. v. State Bd. of Equalization, 19 Cal.2d 181, 187 , 120 P.2d 1, 5 (1941) (one who merely prepares a sandwich for consumption without offering any facilities for its consumption on the premises and with intent that it be consumed elsewhere has not “served” a meal within the meaning of retail sales tax act). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Leemangreen1 sentence1976The Maine court rejected the pleadings approach in State v. Leeman, 291 A.2d 709, 710-711 (Me.1972), by stating: “While contrary authority is found in the decisions from several jurisdictions [citing a California case setting out the rule the pleading should be considered], the general rule of law permits a conviction of a lesser offense than that charged only if the lesser, as legally defined, is necessarily a constituent part of the greater, as legally defined. * * * We are satisfied that our own decisions have followed the majority view which our own Rule 31(c) has adopted and that it is th | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Arizona v. Johnsongreen1 sentence2021To determine the reasonableness of the seizure, we must employ a dual inquiry: (1) was the officer’s conduct justified at its inception and (2) was the conduct “reasonably related in scope to the circumstances which justified the interference in the first place.” Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 , 19–20 (1968); see United States v. McSwain, 29 F.3d 558, 561 (10th Cir. 1994) (holding initially valid stop based on suspicion of registration violation evolved into unreasonable detention); but see Arizona v. Johnson, 555 U.S. 323, 333 (2009) (allowing questioning on matters unrelated to justification for | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Terry v. Ohio
green
1 sentence2021To determine the reasonableness of the seizure, we must employ a dual inquiry: (1) was the officer’s conduct justified at its inception and (2) was the conduct “reasonably related in scope to the circumstances which justified the interference in the first place.” Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 , 19–20 (1968); see United States v. McSwain, 29 F.3d 558, 561 (10th Cir. 1994) (holding initially valid stop based on suspicion of registration violation evolved into unreasonable detention); but see Arizona v. Johnson, 555 U.S. 323, 333 (2009) (allowing questioning on matters unrelated to justification for | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Johnston v. Percy Construction, Inc.
green
2 sentences1981In Johnston , under a dual analysis of rules 88 and 90, the trial court was held to have abused its discretion by denying the plaintiff leave to amend his petition. 258 N.W.2d at 371 . 1981In Johnston , under a dual analysis of rules 88 and 90, the trial court was held to have abused its discretion by denying the plaintiff leave to amend his petition. 258 N.W.2d at 371 . | 1 | 1981–1981 |
Everett v. Brewer
green
1 sentence1976In any event, such contention was laid to rest by this statement in Everett v. Brewer, 215 N.W.2d at 246 : “ * * * In State v. Habhab we reaffirmed State v. Hawkins but rejected the notion the facts alone can supply a needed element for an included offense.” Instead, defendant urges this court to adopt a dual test for determining whether a proposed lesser offense is necessarily included in the greater offense charged consisting *801 of the pleading or indictment approach and the legal element test. | 1 | 1976–1976 |
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.