polygraph test (Montana) · Go Syfert
← Montana issues

polygraph test in Montana

8 Montana opinions name it 1 courts 1978–2008 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Montana 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 (2)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Staatgreen
mont · 1991 · cited in 2 Montana opinions naming this issue, 2003–2008
2 sentences

2008He is correct that polygraph results are inadmissible, but he is incorrect that inadmissibility of results renders the polygraph condition illegal. ¶18 In State v. Staat, 248 Mont. 291 , 811 P.2d 1261 (1991), Staat was released on bond pending his appeal and his bond subsequently was revoked based on the results of a court-ordered polygraph test.

2008He is correct that polygraph results are inadmissible, but he is incorrect that inadmissibility of results renders the polygraph condition illegal. ¶18 In State v. Staat, 248 Mont. 291 , 811 P.2d 1261 (1991), Staat was released on bond pending his appeal and his bond subsequently was revoked based on the results of a court-ordered polygraph test.

12
State v. Bashorgreen
mont · 1980 · cited in 1 Montana opinions naming this issue, 1980–1980
2 sentences

1980See State v. Bashor (1980), 188 Mont. 397 , 614 P.2d 470 .

1980See State v. Bashor (1980), 188 Mont. 397 , 614 P.2d 470 .

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Also cited on this issue (9)

CaseCitedYears
State v. Anderson green
mont · 1999
2 sentences

2008Although we held that polygraph examination results were not admissible in any court proceeding, the legality of the court’s underlying order that Staat take a polygraph test was neither raised nor addressed. ¶19 We further refined the “not admissible” rule in State v. Anderson, 1999 MT 58 , 293 Mont. 472 , 977 P.2d 315 .

2008Although we held that polygraph examination results were not admissible in any court proceeding, the legality of the court’s underlying order that Staat take a polygraph test was neither raised nor addressed. ¶19 We further refined the “not admissible” rule in State v. Anderson, 1999 MT 58 , 293 Mont. 472 , 977 P.2d 315 .

22007–2008
State v. Duffy green
mont · 2000
2 sentences

2003State v. Duffy, 2000 MT 186, ¶ 18 , 300 Mont. 381, ¶ 18 , *401 6 P.3d 453, ¶ 18 . ¶104 DuBray underwent a polygraph test, and was given a copy of the polygraph report.

2003State v. Duffy, 2000 MT 186, ¶ 18 , 300 Mont. 381, ¶ 18 , *401 6 P.3d 453, ¶ 18 . ¶104 DuBray underwent a polygraph test, and was given a copy of the polygraph report.

12003–2003
Steer, Inc. v. Department of Revenue green
mont · 1990
2 sentences

1999Steer, Inc. v. Department of Revenue (1990), 245 Mont. 470, 475 , 803 P.2d 601, 603-604 .

1999Steer, Inc. v. Department of Revenue (1990), 245 Mont. 470, 475 , 803 P.2d 601, 603-604 .

11999–1999
Carbon County v. Union Reserve Coal Co., Inc. green
mont · 1995
2 sentences

1999Carbon County v. Union Reserve Coal Co., Inc. (1995), 271 Mont. 459, 469 , 898 P.2d 680, 686 . ¶ 11 Anderson argues that the District Court abused its discretion in not granting his motion to continue the sentencing hearing so that a new evaluation could be performed without the use of a polygraph test.

1999Carbon County v. Union Reserve Coal Co., Inc. (1995), 271 Mont. 459, 469 , 898 P.2d 680, 686 . ¶ 11 Anderson argues that the District Court abused its discretion in not granting his motion to continue the sentencing hearing so that a new evaluation could be performed without the use of a polygraph test.

11999–1999
State v. Craig green
mont · 1993
2 sentences

1995In State v. Craig (1993), 262 Mont. 240 , 864 P.2d 1240 , the defendant had slept prior to the exam and the officers did not lie about evidence, however we still held that the district court did not err in suppressing a statement made by the defendant following a polygraph examination where police officers used the results of the polygraph to elicit a statement or confession.

1995In State v. Craig (1993), 262 Mont. 240 , 864 P.2d 1240 , the defendant had slept prior to the exam and the officers did not lie about evidence, however we still held that the district court did not err in suppressing a statement made by the defendant following a polygraph examination where police officers used the results of the polygraph to elicit a statement or confession.

11995–1995
State v. Mayes green
mont · 1992
1 sentence

1995Mayes, 825 P.2d 1196 .

11995–1995
Gropp v. Lotton green
mont · 1972
2 sentences

1986Judge Henson granted the motion in limine and excluded the polygraph test of Britton, relying on State v. Beachman (Mont.1980), 616 P.2d 337 , 37 St.Rep. 1558 ; Gropp v. Lotton (1972), 160 Mont. 415 , 503 P.2d 661 , as determining that in Montana polygraph results are inadmissible in civil and criminal trials.

1986Judge Henson granted the motion in limine and excluded the polygraph test of Britton, relying on State v. Beachman (Mont.1980), 616 P.2d 337 , 37 St.Rep. 1558 ; Gropp v. Lotton (1972), 160 Mont. 415 , 503 P.2d 661 , as determining that in Montana polygraph results are inadmissible in civil and criminal trials.

11986–1986
State v. Beachman green
mont · 1980
2 sentences

1986Judge Henson granted the motion in limine and excluded the polygraph test of Britton, relying on State v. Beachman (Mont.1980), 616 P.2d 337 , 37 St.Rep. 1558 ; Gropp v. Lotton (1972), 160 Mont. 415 , 503 P.2d 661 , as determining that in Montana polygraph results are inadmissible in civil and criminal trials.

1986Judge Henson granted the motion in limine and excluded the polygraph test of Britton, relying on State v. Beachman (Mont. 1980), 616 P.2d 337 , 37 St.

11986–1986
State v. Stanislawski green
wis · 1974
2 sentences

1978Defendant urges that Montana should adopt the rule set forth in State v. Stanislawski (1974), 62 Wis.2d 730 , 216 N.W.2d 8 , wherein the Wisconsin Supreme Court set forth criteria for admissibility of polygraph evidence.

1978Defendant urges that Montana should adopt the rule set forth in State v. Stanislawski (1974), 62 Wis.2d 730 , 216 N.W.2d 8 , wherein the Wisconsin Supreme Court set forth criteria for admissibility of polygraph evidence.

11978–1978

Where else courts name it

TX 174 (1964–2025) PA 113 (1955–2026) IL 97 (1966–2026) OH 89 (1973–2025) NY 73 (1968–2025) CA 70 (1959–2025) MI 64 (1970–2026) IN 56 (1971–2025) GA 51 (1975–2021) NJ 48 (1964–2026) FL 40 (1963–2013) MS 38 (1975–2022) OR 36 (1974–2025) WA 35 (1972–2026) MD 32 (1964–2021) MA 32 (1968–2025) NC 31 (1975–2014) WV 29 (1979–2023) AZ 29 (1964–2025) WI 27 (1974–2021) TN 27 (1964–2022) LA 24 (1970–2017) MN 23 (1977–2017) MO 22 (1974–2024) AL 21 (1971–2014) IA 20 (1972–2021) NM 19 (1974–2024) KS 17 (1969–2024) ME 15 (1975–2017) VA 15 (1986–2025) AR 15 (1978–2025) CO 14 (1981–2012) SD 11 (1973–2018) OK 10 (1977–2025) KY 10 (1977–2020) SC 10 (1973–2016) CT 9 (1966–2016) MT 8 (1978–2008) NH 8 (1965–2023) DE 8 (1981–2018) WY 7 (1977–2025) ND 7 (1978–1998) UT 7 (1985–2025) ID 6 (1979–2018) NE 6 (1979–2020) HI 4 (1962–2025) DC 4 (1996–2018) AK 4 (1979–1989) NV 4 (1976–1991) VT 3 (1975–2018) RI 3 (1981–1984)

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