demanding standard (Idaho) · Go Syfert
← Idaho issues

demanding standard in Idaho

10 Idaho opinions name it 2 courts 1977–2022 1 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.

Followed or applied (6)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Gallegosgreen
idaho · 1992 · cited in 4 Idaho opinions naming this issue, 1998–2012
2 sentences

2012State v. Gallegos, 120 Idaho 894, 896 , 821 P.2d 949, 951 (1991).

2012State v. Gallegos, 120 Idaho 894, 896 , 821 P.2d 949, 951 (1991).

24
Troxel v. Granvillegreen
scotus · 2000 · cited in 1 Idaho opinions naming this issue, 2022–2022
1 sentence

2022Id. at 79 (Souter, J., concurring in the judgment).

11
State v. Doegreen
idaho · 2010 · cited in 1 Idaho opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014
2 sentences

2014See, e.g., State v. Doe, 148 Idaho 919, 930-31 , 231 P.3d 1016, 1027-28 (2010) (citing to Kolender for the standard of definiteness required of a criminal statute, but then citing to Vill. of Hoffman Estates for the proposition that an ordinance alleged to be facially vague must be shown to be impermissibly vague in all its applications).

2014See, e.g., State v. Doe, 148 Idaho 919, 930-31 , 231 P.3d 1016, 1027-28 (2010) (citing to Kolender for the standard of definiteness required of a criminal statute, but then citing to Vill. of Hoffman Estates for the proposition that an ordinance alleged to be facially vague must be shown to be impermissibly vague in all its applications).

11
Alabama v. Whitegreen
scotus · 1990 · cited in 1 Idaho opinions naming this issue, 2010–2010
1 sentence

2010Nevertheless, an anonymous tip alone cannot supply the requisite basis for reasonable suspicion, State v. Hankey, 134 Idaho 844, 848 , 11 P.3d 40, 44 (2000), let alone for probable cause which is a more demanding standard than reasonable suspicion both in terms of quantity and content of information, as well as in reliability thereof, Alabama v. White, 496 U.S. 325, 329-32 (1990).

11
State v. Hankeygreen
idaho · 2000 · cited in 1 Idaho opinions naming this issue, 2010–2010
2 sentences

2010Nevertheless, an anonymous tip alone cannot supply the requisite basis for reasonable suspicion, State v. Hankey, 134 Idaho 844, 848 , 11 P.3d 40, 44 (2000), let alone for probable cause which is a more demanding standard than reasonable suspicion both in terms of quantity and content of information, as well as in reliability thereof, Alabama v. White, 496 U.S. 325, 329-32 (1990).

2010Nevertheless, an anonymous tip alone cannot supply the requisite basis for reasonable suspicion, State v. Hankey, 134 Idaho 844, 848 , 11 P.3d 40, 44 (2000), let alone for probable cause which is a more demanding standard than reasonable suspicion both in terms of quantity and content of information, as well as in reliability thereof, Alabama v. White, 496 U.S. 325, 329-32 (1990).

11
State v. DuValtgreen
idaho · 1998 · cited in 1 Idaho opinions naming this issue, 1999–1999
2 sentences

1999Reasonable articulable suspicion is intended as "a less demanding standard than the probable cause standard." State v. DuValt, 131 Idaho 550, 553 , 961 P.2d 641, 644 (1998).

1999Reasonable articulable suspicion is intended as "a less demanding standard than the probable cause standard." State v. DuValt, 131 Idaho 550, 553 , 961 P.2d 641, 644 (1998).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Idaho. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (2)

CaseCitedYears
Paullus v. Liedkie green
idaho · 1968
2 sentences

1979The appellants apparently confuse the requirement that a movant set out specific reasons in support of his motion for a new trial, Paullis v. Liedke, 92 Idaho 323 , 442 P.2d 733 (1968), with the less demanding requirement that the court granting the motion need only state the grounds upon which it is granted.

1979The appellants apparently confuse the requirement that a movant set out specific reasons in support of his motion for a new trial, Paullis v. Liedke, 92 Idaho 323 , 442 P.2d 733 (1968), with the less demanding requirement that the court granting the motion need only state the grounds upon which it is granted.

11979–1979
Rosenbloom v. Metromedia, Inc. red
scotus · 1971
2 sentences

1977Rosenbloom v. Metromedia, Inc., 403 U.S. 29, 52 , 91 S.Ct. 1811 , 29 L.Ed.2d 296 (1971).

1977Rosenbloom v. Metromedia, Inc., 403 U.S. 29, 52 , 91 S.Ct. 1811 , 29 L.Ed.2d 296 (1971).

11977–1977

Where else courts name it

CA 118 (1975–2026) CT 118 (1970–2026) IL 110 (1960–2026) TX 91 (1976–2026) TN 78 (1978–2025) MD 69 (1975–2026) PA 66 (1976–2026) NY 64 (1961–2026) NJ 61 (1975–2026) IA 61 (1979–2026) OH 54 (1982–2025) MI 53 (1995–2026) WA 51 (1974–2025) IN 51 (1983–2025) FL 44 (1986–2025) NC 43 (1993–2026) KS 42 (1992–2026) DC 38 (1970–2024) CO 35 (1986–2026) AL 34 (1991–2026) OR 32 (1974–2025) MA 31 (1979–2025) DE 28 (1991–2025) LA 24 (1986–2025) WI 24 (1977–2024) NM 22 (1992–2022) VA 19 (1980–2015) MO 14 (1999–2021) MN 13 (1995–2024) GA 11 (1978–2026) NH 10 (1989–2021) ID 10 (1977–2022) MT 10 (1978–2025) AK 10 (1979–2026) KY 8 (1996–2025) WV 8 (1985–2025) SD 8 (1990–2021) VT 7 (2000–2020) HI 7 (1995–2008) WY 6 (2003–2019) NV 6 (2014–2017) AZ 6 (1999–2019) VI 5 (2005–2026) OK 5 (1980–2020) AR 4 (1979–2025) SC 4 (2001–2025) ME 4 (1973–2014) ND 3 (1980–2007) RI 2 (2005–2010) NE 2 (1992–2021)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check