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.
9 Wyoming opinions name it 1 courts 1970–2016 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Wyoming 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 |
|---|---|---|
Janpol v. Stategreen2 sentences2016Janpol v. State, 2008 WY 21, ¶ 7 , 178 P.3d 396, 399 (Wyo. 2008). [¶30] Lemley contends the district court abused its discretion in failing to give the following proffered instruction: To convict for constructive possession of illicit drugs, the prosecution must establish that the Defendant: (1) either individually or jointly with another exercised dominion and control over the substance; (2) had knowledge of its presence; and (3) had knowledge that the substance was a controlled substance. 7 As we indicated above in our discussion of Lemley’s sufficiency of the evidence question, this instruc 2016Janpol v. State, 2008 WY 21, ¶ 7 , 178 P.3d 396, 399 (Wyo. 2008). [¶30] Lemley contends the district court abused its discretion in failing to give the following proffered instruction: To convict for constructive possession of illicit drugs, the prosecution must establish that the Defendant: (1) either individually or jointly with another exercised dominion and control over the substance; (2) had knowledge of its presence; and (3) had knowledge that the substance was a controlled substance. 7 As we indicated above in our discussion of Lemley’s sufficiency of the evidence question, this instruc | 1 | 1 |
Johnson v. Stategreen2 sentences1995“If the rule incorporated in a proffered instruction is included in other instructions, it properly may be refused by the trial court.” Johnson v. State, 872 P.2d 93, 99 (Wyo.1994). 1995"If the rule incorporated in a proffered instruction is included in other instructions, it properly may be refused by the trial court." Johnson v. State, 872 P.2d 93, 99 (Wyo.1994). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Wyoming. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Carden v. Kelly
green
1 sentence2012The proffered instruction stating that contracts may be a source of a duty of care would in her view have tied the "skilled guides" language to the question on the verdict form. [¶ 38] Appellant points out that the United States District Court for the District of Wyoming dealt with a related issue in Carden v. Kelly, 175 F.Supp.2d 1318 (D.Wyo.2001). | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Wilson v. State
green
1 sentence2000Wilson v. State, 14 P.3d 912, 916 , (Wyo.2000). | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Prime v. State
green
1 sentence1994Prime v. State, 767 P.2d 149 (Wyo.1989). | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Hatheway v. State
green
2 sentences1992Hatheway v. State, 623 P.2d 741 (Wyo.1981). 1992Hatheway v. State, 623 P.2d 741 (Wyo.1981). | 1 | 1992–1992 |
State v. Selig
green
1 sentence1982State v. Selig, Wyo., 635 P.2d 786 (1981). | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Erling David Larsen v. General Motors Corporation, a Delaware Corporation
green
1 sentence1974INSTRUCTIONS Appellant’s other proposition is that the court erred in its refusal to give the following proffered instruction: “YOU ARE INSTRUCTED that the manufacturer of a product has a duty of using reasonable care under circumstances so as to design its product to make it not accident or fool proof but safe for functional use for which it was intended and such requirement includes a duty to design product so that it will fairly meet emergencies which can reasonably^ be anticipated but a manufacturer is not an insurer that its product is from design viewpoint incapable of producing injury.” | 1 | 1974–1974 |
People v. Williams
green
1 sentence1970The Williams case specifically recognized that whether a refusal to give a cautionary instruction is prejudicial error depends upon the circumstances of each case. 131 P.2d 851 . | 1 | 1970–1970 |
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.