totality of the circumstances test (Oklahoma) · Go Syfert
← Oklahoma issues

totality of the circumstances test in Oklahoma

8 Oklahoma opinions name it 1 courts 1979–2021 1 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Oklahoma 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 (10)

CaseFollowedCited
United States v. Kitchellgreen
ca10 · 2011 · cited in 1 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 2021–2021
2 sentences

2021Under the totality of the circumstances test, these facts justify "a particularized and objective basis for suspecting legal wrongdoing." Kitchell , 653 F.3d at 1218 (internal quotation omitted).

2021Under the totality of the circumstances test, these facts justify "a particularized and objective basis for suspecting legal wrongdoing." Kitchell , 653 F.3d at 1218 (internal quotation omitted).

11
Brinegar v. United Statesgreen
scotus · 1949 · cited in 1 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 2007–2007
2 sentences

2007See Brinegar v. United States, 338 U.S. 160, 175-76 , 69 S.Ct. 1302, 1310-11 , 93 L.Ed. 1879 (1949). ¶ 11 We find the totality of the circumstances analysis for determining probable cause in "plain feel" cases is the better approach to apply.

2007See Brinegar v. United States, 338 U.S. 160, 175-76 , 69 S.Ct. 1302, 1310-11 , 93 L.Ed. 1879 (1949). ¶ 11 We find the totality of the circumstances analysis for determining probable cause in "plain feel" cases is the better approach to apply.

11
Lewis v. Stategreen
oklacrimapp · 1984 · cited in 1 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 2001–2001
2 sentences

2001"Where the totality of the circumstances reflect that a defendant's decision [to waive counsel] would have been affected had he known an attorney was present, then admission of any statements made during questioning under those circumstances is error." Id. at ¶ 20, 990 P.2d at 286 ; see also Lewis v. State, 1984 OK CR 93 , 695 P.2d 528 . *875 ¶ 15 We find Dennis/Lewis inapplicable to this situation.

2001"Where the totality of the circumstances reflect that a defendant's decision [to waive counsel] would have been affected had he known an attorney was present, then admission of any statements made during questioning under those circumstances is error." Id. at ¶ 20, 990 P.2d at 286 ; see also Lewis v. State, 1984 OK CR 93 , 695 P.2d 528 . *875 ¶ 15 We find Dennis/Lewis inapplicable to this situation.

11
Krishnamurthy v. Nimmagaddared
scotus · 1998 · cited in 1 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 1999–1999
2 sentences

1999See, e.g., Le v. State, 1997 OK CR 55 , 947 P.2d 535, 542 , cert. denied, 524 U.S. 930 , 118 S.Ct. 2329 , 141 L.Ed.2d 702 (1998). [1] In Michigan v. Long , the Supreme Court stated: Respect for the independence of state courts, as well as avoidance of rendering advisory opinions, have been the cornerstones of this Court's refusal to decide cases where there is an adequate and independent state ground.

1999See, e.g., Le v. State, 1997 OK CR 55 , 947 P.2d 535, 542 , cert. denied, 524 U.S. 930 , 118 S.Ct. 2329 , 141 L.Ed.2d 702 (1998).

11
Goodwin v. Stategreen
texcrimapp · 1990 · cited in 1 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 1999–1999
1 sentence

1999State v. Beck, 687 S.W.2d 155 (1985). [21] ABA Standards for Criminal Justice 5-5.1, 5-7.1. [22] 288 Or. 59 , 602 P.2d 272 (1979). [23] 602 P.2d at 278-79. [24] 602 P.2d at 272. [25] State v. Neal, 150 Or.App. 231 , 945 P.2d 637 (1997); State v. Charboneau, 323 Or. 38 , 913 P.2d 308 (1996) (en banc); State v. Simonsen, 319 Or. 510 , 878 P.2d 409 (1994) (en banc); State v. Isom, 306 Or. 587 , 761 P.2d 524 (1988). [26] Charboneau, 913 P.2d at 318-19 . [27] Hanson, 401 N.W.2d at 778 . [28] Tilley, 963 P.2d at 614 (citation omitted). [29] 696 S.W.2d at 569 . [30] Id. at 570 . [31] Id. at 569 . [32

11
Scribner v. Stategreen
oklacrimapp · 1913 · cited in 1 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 1999–1999
1 sentence

1999This finding is bolstered by the brief ruling in Tilley , where we adopted Burbine to resolve a state law question and cited Lewis as precedent for the state law issue. [35] 206 Conn. 157 , 537 A.2d 446, 452 (1988). [36] Id. at 452 (citations omitted). [37] Id. (citations omitted). [38] Id. [39] Id. at 454 (citations omitted). [40] Id. at 456 (citations omitted). [41] 1975 OK CR 148 , 538 P.2d 1080, 1086 ; see also Tilley, 963 P.2d at 614 . [42] Scribner v. State, 9 Okl.Cr.465, 132 P. 933, 938 . [43] Our adoption of the totality of the circumstances test also comports with our settled law appl

11
State v. Haynesgreen
or · 1979 · cited in 1 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 1999–1999
2 sentences

1999State v. Beck, 687 S.W.2d 155 (1985). [21] ABA Standards for Criminal Justice 5-5.1, 5-7.1. [22] 288 Or. 59 , 602 P.2d 272 (1979). [23] 602 P.2d at 278-79. [24] 602 P.2d at 272. [25] State v. Neal, 150 Or.App. 231 , 945 P.2d 637 (1997); State v. Charboneau, 323 Or. 38 , 913 P.2d 308 (1996) (en banc); State v. Simonsen, 319 Or. 510 , 878 P.2d 409 (1994) (en banc); State v. Isom, 306 Or. 587 , 761 P.2d 524 (1988). [26] Charboneau, 913 P.2d at 318-19 . [27] Hanson, 401 N.W.2d at 778 . [28] Tilley, 963 P.2d at 614 (citation omitted). [29] 696 S.W.2d at 569 . [30] Id. at 570 . [31] Id. at 569 . [32

1999State v. Beck, 687 S.W.2d 155 (1985). [21] ABA Standards for Criminal Justice 5-5.1, 5-7.1. [22] 288 Or. 59 , 602 P.2d 272 (1979). [23] 602 P.2d at 278-79. [24] 602 P.2d at 272. [25] State v. Neal, 150 Or.App. 231 , 945 P.2d 637 (1997); State v. Charboneau, 323 Or. 38 , 913 P.2d 308 (1996) (en banc); State v. Simonsen, 319 Or. 510 , 878 P.2d 409 (1994) (en banc); State v. Isom, 306 Or. 587 , 761 P.2d 524 (1988). [26] Charboneau, 913 P.2d at 318-19 . [27] Hanson, 401 N.W.2d at 778 . [28] Tilley, 963 P.2d at 614 (citation omitted). [29] 696 S.W.2d at 569 . [30] Id. at 570 . [31] Id. at 569 . [32

11
Tilley v. Stategreen
oklacrimapp · 1998 · cited in 1 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 1999–1999
2 sentences

1999This finding is bolstered by the brief ruling in Tilley , where we adopted Burbine to resolve a state law question and cited Lewis as precedent for the state law issue. [35] 206 Conn. 157 , 537 A.2d 446, 452 (1988). [36] Id. at 452 (citations omitted). [37] Id. (citations omitted). [38] Id. [39] Id. at 454 (citations omitted). [40] Id. at 456 (citations omitted). [41] 1975 OK CR 148 , 538 P.2d 1080, 1086 ; see also Tilley, 963 P.2d at 614 . [42] Scribner v. State, 9 Okl.Cr.465, 132 P. 933, 938 . [43] Our adoption of the totality of the circumstances test also comports with our settled law appl

1999State v. Beck, 687 S.W.2d 155 (1985). [21] ABA Standards for Criminal Justice 5-5.1, 5-7.1. [22] 288 Or. 59 , 602 P.2d 272 (1979). [23] 602 P.2d at 278-79. [24] 602 P.2d at 272. [25] State v. Neal, 150 Or.App. 231 , 945 P.2d 637 (1997); State v. Charboneau, 323 Or. 38 , 913 P.2d 308 (1996) (en banc); State v. Simonsen, 319 Or. 510 , 878 P.2d 409 (1994) (en banc); State v. Isom, 306 Or. 587 , 761 P.2d 524 (1988). [26] Charboneau, 913 P.2d at 318-19 . [27] Hanson, 401 N.W.2d at 778 . [28] Tilley, 963 P.2d at 614 (citation omitted). [29] 696 S.W.2d at 569 . [30] Id. at 570 . [31] Id. at 569 . [32

11
Hung Thanh Le v. Stategreen
oklacrimapp · 1997 · cited in 1 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 1999–1999
2 sentences

1999See, e.g., Le v. State, 1997 OK CR 55 , 947 P.2d 535, 542 , cert. denied, 524 U.S. 930 , 118 S.Ct. 2329 , 141 L.Ed.2d 702 (1998).

1999See, e.g., Le v. State, 1997 OK CR 55 , 947 P.2d 535, 542 , cert. denied, 524 U.S. 930 , 118 S.Ct. 2329 , 141 L.Ed.2d 702 (1998).

11
State v. Stoddardgreen
conn · 1988 · cited in 1 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 1999–1999
2 sentences

1999This finding is bolstered by the brief ruling in Tilley , where we adopted Burbine to resolve a state law question and cited Lewis as precedent for the state law issue. [35] 206 Conn. 157 , 537 A.2d 446, 452 (1988). [36] Id. at 452 (citations omitted). [37] Id. (citations omitted). [38] Id. [39] Id. at 454 (citations omitted). [40] Id. at 456 (citations omitted). [41] 1975 OK CR 148 , 538 P.2d 1080, 1086 ; see also Tilley, 963 P.2d at 614 . [42] Scribner v. State, 9 Okl.Cr.465, 132 P. 933, 938 . [43] Our adoption of the totality of the circumstances test also comports with our settled law appl

1999This finding is bolstered by the brief ruling in Tilley , where we adopted Burbine to resolve a state law question and cited Lewis as precedent for the state law issue. [35] 206 Conn. 157 , 537 A.2d 446, 452 (1988). [36] Id. at 452 (citations omitted). [37] Id. (citations omitted). [38] Id. [39] Id. at 454 (citations omitted). [40] Id. at 456 (citations omitted). [41] 1975 OK CR 148 , 538 P.2d 1080, 1086 ; see also Tilley, 963 P.2d at 614 . [42] Scribner v. State, 9 Okl.Cr.465, 132 P. 933, 938 . [43] Our adoption of the totality of the circumstances test also comports with our settled law appl

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Also cited on this issue (28)

CaseCitedYears
Dennis v. State green
oklacrimapp · 1999
2 sentences

2001However, counsel argues this Court should not interpret the Sixth Amendment so restrictively and urges us to apply the totality of the circumstances test adopted in Dennis v. State, 1999 OK CR 23 , 990 P.2d 277 , to determine whether Appellant could knowingly and voluntarily waive his right to counsel when his court-appointed attorney on other charges in another county was not informed of his arrest and transportation to Creek County. ¶ 14 We restricted our decision in Dennis to apply "only where an attorney is present while a defendant is questioned and actively tries to see the defendant, wh

2001However, counsel argues this Court should not interpret the Sixth Amendment so restrictively and urges us to apply the totality of the circumstances test adopted in Dennis v. State, 1999 OK CR 23 , 990 P.2d 277 , to determine whether Appellant could knowingly and voluntarily waive his right to counsel when his court-appointed attorney on other charges in another county was not informed of his arrest and transportation to Creek County. ¶ 14 We restricted our decision in Dennis to apply "only where an attorney is present while a defendant is questioned and actively tries to see the defendant, wh

12001–2001
State v. Gibson green
nc · 1995
2 sentences

1999The same situation appears to apply to State v. Hickman, 175 W.Va. 709 , 338 S.E.2d 188 (1985) (cited by the State). [17] Commonwealth v. Cryer, 426 Mass. 562 , 689 N.E.2d 808 (1998) (finding no federal violation under Burbine ; specifically does not decide whether state constitution violated since that issue was not presented under facts of case); State v. Gibson, 342 N.C. 142 , 463 S.E.2d 193 (1995) (relying on Reese, below, for federal question and holding failure to inform juvenile of parents' and attorney's presence does not violate state juvenile rights statute); State v. Reese, 319 N.C.

1999The same situation appears to apply to State v. Hickman, 175 W.Va. 709 , 338 S.E.2d 188 (1985) (cited by the State). [17] Commonwealth v. Cryer, 426 Mass. 562 , 689 N.E.2d 808 (1998) (finding no federal violation under Burbine ; specifically does not decide whether state constitution violated since that issue was not presented under facts of case); State v. Gibson, 342 N.C. 142 , 463 S.E.2d 193 (1995) (relying on Reese, below, for federal question and holding failure to inform juvenile of parents' and attorney's presence does not violate state juvenile rights statute); State v. Reese, 319 N.C.

11999–1999
State v. Hickman green
wva · 1985
2 sentences

1999The same situation appears to apply to State v. Hickman, 175 W.Va. 709 , 338 S.E.2d 188 (1985) (cited by the State). [17] Commonwealth v. Cryer, 426 Mass. 562 , 689 N.E.2d 808 (1998) (finding no federal violation under Burbine ; specifically does not decide whether state constitution violated since that issue was not presented under facts of case); State v. Gibson, 342 N.C. 142 , 463 S.E.2d 193 (1995) (relying on Reese, below, for federal question and holding failure to inform juvenile of parents' and attorney's presence does not violate state juvenile rights statute); State v. Reese, 319 N.C.

1999The same situation appears to apply to State v. Hickman, 175 W.Va. 709 , 338 S.E.2d 188 (1985) (cited by the State). [17] Commonwealth v. Cryer, 426 Mass. 562 , 689 N.E.2d 808 (1998) (finding no federal violation under Burbine ; specifically does not decide whether state constitution violated since that issue was not presented under facts of case); State v. Gibson, 342 N.C. 142 , 463 S.E.2d 193 (1995) (relying on Reese, below, for federal question and holding failure to inform juvenile of parents' and attorney's presence does not violate state juvenile rights statute); State v. Reese, 319 N.C.

11999–1999
Commonwealth v. Rigler green
pa · 1980
2 sentences

1999This was decided under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and the case would appear to be superseded by Burbine (in 1980 the same court adopted a totality of the circumstances rule on the issue, again relying on federal law, in Commonwealth v. Rigler, 488 Pa. 441 , 412 A.2d 846 (1980)).

1999This was decided under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and the case would appear to be superseded by Burbine (in 1980 the same court adopted a totality of the circumstances rule on the issue, again relying on federal law, in Commonwealth v. Rigler, 488 Pa. 441 , 412 A.2d 846 (1980)).

11999–1999
State v. Isom green
or · 1988
2 sentences

1999State v. Beck, 687 S.W.2d 155 (1985). [21] ABA Standards for Criminal Justice 5-5.1, 5-7.1. [22] 288 Or. 59 , 602 P.2d 272 (1979). [23] 602 P.2d at 278-79. [24] 602 P.2d at 272. [25] State v. Neal, 150 Or.App. 231 , 945 P.2d 637 (1997); State v. Charboneau, 323 Or. 38 , 913 P.2d 308 (1996) (en banc); State v. Simonsen, 319 Or. 510 , 878 P.2d 409 (1994) (en banc); State v. Isom, 306 Or. 587 , 761 P.2d 524 (1988). [26] Charboneau, 913 P.2d at 318-19 . [27] Hanson, 401 N.W.2d at 778 . [28] Tilley, 963 P.2d at 614 (citation omitted). [29] 696 S.W.2d at 569 . [30] Id. at 570 . [31] Id. at 569 . [32

1999State v. Beck, 687 S.W.2d 155 (1985). [21] ABA Standards for Criminal Justice 5-5.1, 5-7.1. [22] 288 Or. 59 , 602 P.2d 272 (1979). [23] 602 P.2d at 278-79. [24] 602 P.2d at 272. [25] State v. Neal, 150 Or.App. 231 , 945 P.2d 637 (1997); State v. Charboneau, 323 Or. 38 , 913 P.2d 308 (1996) (en banc); State v. Simonsen, 319 Or. 510 , 878 P.2d 409 (1994) (en banc); State v. Isom, 306 Or. 587 , 761 P.2d 524 (1988). [26] Charboneau, 913 P.2d at 318-19 . [27] Hanson, 401 N.W.2d at 778 . [28] Tilley, 963 P.2d at 614 (citation omitted). [29] 696 S.W.2d at 569 . [30] Id. at 570 . [31] Id. at 569 . [32

11999–1999
Michigan v. Long green
scotus · 1983
2 sentences

1999State v. Beck, 687 S.W.2d 155 (1985). [21] ABA Standards for Criminal Justice 5-5.1, 5-7.1. [22] 288 Or. 59 , 602 P.2d 272 (1979). [23] 602 P.2d at 278-79. [24] 602 P.2d at 272. [25] State v. Neal, 150 Or.App. 231 , 945 P.2d 637 (1997); State v. Charboneau, 323 Or. 38 , 913 P.2d 308 (1996) (en banc); State v. Simonsen, 319 Or. 510 , 878 P.2d 409 (1994) (en banc); State v. Isom, 306 Or. 587 , 761 P.2d 524 (1988). [26] Charboneau, 913 P.2d at 318-19 . [27] Hanson, 401 N.W.2d at 778 . [28] Tilley, 963 P.2d at 614 (citation omitted). [29] 696 S.W.2d at 569 . [30] Id. at 570 . [31] Id. at 569 . [32

1999State v. Beck, 687 S.W.2d 155 (1985). [21] ABA Standards for Criminal Justice 5-5.1, 5-7.1. [22] 288 Or. 59 , 602 P.2d 272 (1979). [23] 602 P.2d at 278-79. [24] 602 P.2d at 272. [25] State v. Neal, 150 Or.App. 231 , 945 P.2d 637 (1997); State v. Charboneau, 323 Or. 38 , 913 P.2d 308 (1996) (en banc); State v. Simonsen, 319 Or. 510 , 878 P.2d 409 (1994) (en banc); State v. Isom, 306 Or. 587 , 761 P.2d 524 (1988). [26] Charboneau, 913 P.2d at 318-19 . [27] Hanson, 401 N.W.2d at 778 . [28] Tilley, 963 P.2d at 614 (citation omitted). [29] 696 S.W.2d at 569 . [30] Id. at 570 . [31] Id. at 569 . [32

11999–1999
State v. Hanson green
wis · 1987
1 sentence

1999State v. Beck, 687 S.W.2d 155 (1985). [21] ABA Standards for Criminal Justice 5-5.1, 5-7.1. [22] 288 Or. 59 , 602 P.2d 272 (1979). [23] 602 P.2d at 278-79. [24] 602 P.2d at 272. [25] State v. Neal, 150 Or.App. 231 , 945 P.2d 637 (1997); State v. Charboneau, 323 Or. 38 , 913 P.2d 308 (1996) (en banc); State v. Simonsen, 319 Or. 510 , 878 P.2d 409 (1994) (en banc); State v. Isom, 306 Or. 587 , 761 P.2d 524 (1988). [26] Charboneau, 913 P.2d at 318-19 . [27] Hanson, 401 N.W.2d at 778 . [28] Tilley, 963 P.2d at 614 (citation omitted). [29] 696 S.W.2d at 569 . [30] Id. at 570 . [31] Id. at 569 . [32

11999–1999
State v. Reese red
nc · 1987
2 sentences

1999The same situation appears to apply to State v. Hickman, 175 W.Va. 709 , 338 S.E.2d 188 (1985) (cited by the State). [17] Commonwealth v. Cryer, 426 Mass. 562 , 689 N.E.2d 808 (1998) (finding no federal violation under Burbine ; specifically does not decide whether state constitution violated since that issue was not presented under facts of case); State v. Gibson, 342 N.C. 142 , 463 S.E.2d 193 (1995) (relying on Reese, below, for federal question and holding failure to inform juvenile of parents' and attorney's presence does not violate state juvenile rights statute); State v. Reese, 319 N.C.

1999The same situation appears to apply to State v. Hickman, 175 W.Va. 709 , 338 S.E.2d 188 (1985) (cited by the State). [17] Commonwealth v. Cryer, 426 Mass. 562 , 689 N.E.2d 808 (1998) (finding no federal violation under Burbine ; specifically does not decide whether state constitution violated since that issue was not presented under facts of case); State v. Gibson, 342 N.C. 142 , 463 S.E.2d 193 (1995) (relying on Reese, below, for federal question and holding failure to inform juvenile of parents' and attorney's presence does not violate state juvenile rights statute); State v. Reese, 319 N.C.

11999–1999
Aultman v. State green
alacrimapp · 1992
1 sentence

1999The same situation appears to apply to State v. Hickman, 175 W.Va. 709 , 338 S.E.2d 188 (1985) (cited by the State). [17] Commonwealth v. Cryer, 426 Mass. 562 , 689 N.E.2d 808 (1998) (finding no federal violation under Burbine ; specifically does not decide whether state constitution violated since that issue was not presented under facts of case); State v. Gibson, 342 N.C. 142 , 463 S.E.2d 193 (1995) (relying on Reese, below, for federal question and holding failure to inform juvenile of parents' and attorney's presence does not violate state juvenile rights statute); State v. Reese, 319 N.C.

11999–1999
Dunn v. State yellow
texcrimapp · 1985
2 sentences

1999State v. Beck, 687 S.W.2d 155 (1985). [21] ABA Standards for Criminal Justice 5-5.1, 5-7.1. [22] 288 Or. 59 , 602 P.2d 272 (1979). [23] 602 P.2d at 278-79. [24] 602 P.2d at 272. [25] State v. Neal, 150 Or.App. 231 , 945 P.2d 637 (1997); State v. Charboneau, 323 Or. 38 , 913 P.2d 308 (1996) (en banc); State v. Simonsen, 319 Or. 510 , 878 P.2d 409 (1994) (en banc); State v. Isom, 306 Or. 587 , 761 P.2d 524 (1988). [26] Charboneau, 913 P.2d at 318-19 . [27] Hanson, 401 N.W.2d at 778 . [28] Tilley, 963 P.2d at 614 (citation omitted). [29] 696 S.W.2d at 569 . [30] Id. at 570 . [31] Id. at 569 . [32

1999State v. Beck, 687 S.W.2d 155 (1985). [21] ABA Standards for Criminal Justice 5-5.1, 5-7.1. [22] 288 Or. 59 , 602 P.2d 272 (1979). [23] 602 P.2d at 278-79. [24] 602 P.2d at 272. [25] State v. Neal, 150 Or.App. 231 , 945 P.2d 637 (1997); State v. Charboneau, 323 Or. 38 , 913 P.2d 308 (1996) (en banc); State v. Simonsen, 319 Or. 510 , 878 P.2d 409 (1994) (en banc); State v. Isom, 306 Or. 587 , 761 P.2d 524 (1988). [26] Charboneau, 913 P.2d at 318-19 . [27] Hanson, 401 N.W.2d at 778 . [28] Tilley, 963 P.2d at 614 (citation omitted). [29] 696 S.W.2d at 569 . [30] Id. at 570 . [31] Id. at 569 . [32

11999–1999
Roeder v. State green
texapp · 1988
1 sentence

1999State v. Beck, 687 S.W.2d 155 (1985). [21] ABA Standards for Criminal Justice 5-5.1, 5-7.1. [22] 288 Or. 59 , 602 P.2d 272 (1979). [23] 602 P.2d at 278-79. [24] 602 P.2d at 272. [25] State v. Neal, 150 Or.App. 231 , 945 P.2d 637 (1997); State v. Charboneau, 323 Or. 38 , 913 P.2d 308 (1996) (en banc); State v. Simonsen, 319 Or. 510 , 878 P.2d 409 (1994) (en banc); State v. Isom, 306 Or. 587 , 761 P.2d 524 (1988). [26] Charboneau, 913 P.2d at 318-19 . [27] Hanson, 401 N.W.2d at 778 . [28] Tilley, 963 P.2d at 614 (citation omitted). [29] 696 S.W.2d at 569 . [30] Id. at 570 . [31] Id. at 569 . [32

11999–1999
Commonwealth v. Cryer green
mass · 1998
2 sentences

1999The same situation appears to apply to State v. Hickman, 175 W.Va. 709 , 338 S.E.2d 188 (1985) (cited by the State). [17] Commonwealth v. Cryer, 426 Mass. 562 , 689 N.E.2d 808 (1998) (finding no federal violation under Burbine ; specifically does not decide whether state constitution violated since that issue was not presented under facts of case); State v. Gibson, 342 N.C. 142 , 463 S.E.2d 193 (1995) (relying on Reese, below, for federal question and holding failure to inform juvenile of parents' and attorney's presence does not violate state juvenile rights statute); State v. Reese, 319 N.C.

1999The same situation appears to apply to State v. Hickman, 175 W.Va. 709 , 338 S.E.2d 188 (1985) (cited by the State). [17] Commonwealth v. Cryer, 426 Mass. 562 , 689 N.E.2d 808 (1998) (finding no federal violation under Burbine ; specifically does not decide whether state constitution violated since that issue was not presented under facts of case); State v. Gibson, 342 N.C. 142 , 463 S.E.2d 193 (1995) (relying on Reese, below, for federal question and holding failure to inform juvenile of parents' and attorney's presence does not violate state juvenile rights statute); State v. Reese, 319 N.C.

11999–1999
State v. Beck green
mo · 1985
2 sentences

1999State v. Beck, 687 S.W.2d 155 (1985). [21] ABA Standards for Criminal Justice 5-5.1, 5-7.1. [22] 288 Or. 59 , 602 P.2d 272 (1979). [23] 602 P.2d at 278-79. [24] 602 P.2d at 272. [25] State v. Neal, 150 Or.App. 231 , 945 P.2d 637 (1997); State v. Charboneau, 323 Or. 38 , 913 P.2d 308 (1996) (en banc); State v. Simonsen, 319 Or. 510 , 878 P.2d 409 (1994) (en banc); State v. Isom, 306 Or. 587 , 761 P.2d 524 (1988). [26] Charboneau, 913 P.2d at 318-19 . [27] Hanson, 401 N.W.2d at 778 . [28] Tilley, 963 P.2d at 614 (citation omitted). [29] 696 S.W.2d at 569 . [30] Id. at 570 . [31] Id. at 569 . [32

1999State v. Beck, 687 S.W.2d 155 (1985). .

11999–1999
State v. Neal neutral
orctapp · 1997
2 sentences

1999State v. Beck, 687 S.W.2d 155 (1985). [21] ABA Standards for Criminal Justice 5-5.1, 5-7.1. [22] 288 Or. 59 , 602 P.2d 272 (1979). [23] 602 P.2d at 278-79. [24] 602 P.2d at 272. [25] State v. Neal, 150 Or.App. 231 , 945 P.2d 637 (1997); State v. Charboneau, 323 Or. 38 , 913 P.2d 308 (1996) (en banc); State v. Simonsen, 319 Or. 510 , 878 P.2d 409 (1994) (en banc); State v. Isom, 306 Or. 587 , 761 P.2d 524 (1988). [26] Charboneau, 913 P.2d at 318-19 . [27] Hanson, 401 N.W.2d at 778 . [28] Tilley, 963 P.2d at 614 (citation omitted). [29] 696 S.W.2d at 569 . [30] Id. at 570 . [31] Id. at 569 . [32

1999State v. Beck, 687 S.W.2d 155 (1985). [21] ABA Standards for Criminal Justice 5-5.1, 5-7.1. [22] 288 Or. 59 , 602 P.2d 272 (1979). [23] 602 P.2d at 278-79. [24] 602 P.2d at 272. [25] State v. Neal, 150 Or.App. 231 , 945 P.2d 637 (1997); State v. Charboneau, 323 Or. 38 , 913 P.2d 308 (1996) (en banc); State v. Simonsen, 319 Or. 510 , 878 P.2d 409 (1994) (en banc); State v. Isom, 306 Or. 587 , 761 P.2d 524 (1988). [26] Charboneau, 913 P.2d at 318-19 . [27] Hanson, 401 N.W.2d at 778 . [28] Tilley, 963 P.2d at 614 (citation omitted). [29] 696 S.W.2d at 569 . [30] Id. at 570 . [31] Id. at 569 . [32

11999–1999
State v. Thomason green
oklacrimapp · 1975
2 sentences

1999This finding is bolstered by the brief ruling in Tilley , where we adopted Burbine to resolve a state law question and cited Lewis as precedent for the state law issue. [35] 206 Conn. 157 , 537 A.2d 446, 452 (1988). [36] Id. at 452 (citations omitted). [37] Id. (citations omitted). [38] Id. [39] Id. at 454 (citations omitted). [40] Id. at 456 (citations omitted). [41] 1975 OK CR 148 , 538 P.2d 1080, 1086 ; see also Tilley, 963 P.2d at 614 . [42] Scribner v. State, 9 Okl.Cr.465, 132 P. 933, 938 . [43] Our adoption of the totality of the circumstances test also comports with our settled law appl

1999This finding is bolstered by the brief ruling in Tilley , where we adopted Burbine to resolve a state law question and cited Lewis as precedent for the state law issue. [35] 206 Conn. 157 , 537 A.2d 446, 452 (1988). [36] Id. at 452 (citations omitted). [37] Id. (citations omitted). [38] Id. [39] Id. at 454 (citations omitted). [40] Id. at 456 (citations omitted). [41] 1975 OK CR 148 , 538 P.2d 1080, 1086 ; see also Tilley, 963 P.2d at 614 . [42] Scribner v. State, 9 Okl.Cr.465, 132 P. 933, 938 . [43] Our adoption of the totality of the circumstances test also comports with our settled law appl

11999–1999
State v. Charboneau green
or · 1996
2 sentences

1999State v. Beck, 687 S.W.2d 155 (1985). [21] ABA Standards for Criminal Justice 5-5.1, 5-7.1. [22] 288 Or. 59 , 602 P.2d 272 (1979). [23] 602 P.2d at 278-79. [24] 602 P.2d at 272. [25] State v. Neal, 150 Or.App. 231 , 945 P.2d 637 (1997); State v. Charboneau, 323 Or. 38 , 913 P.2d 308 (1996) (en banc); State v. Simonsen, 319 Or. 510 , 878 P.2d 409 (1994) (en banc); State v. Isom, 306 Or. 587 , 761 P.2d 524 (1988). [26] Charboneau, 913 P.2d at 318-19 . [27] Hanson, 401 N.W.2d at 778 . [28] Tilley, 963 P.2d at 614 (citation omitted). [29] 696 S.W.2d at 569 . [30] Id. at 570 . [31] Id. at 569 . [32

1999State v. Beck, 687 S.W.2d 155 (1985). [21] ABA Standards for Criminal Justice 5-5.1, 5-7.1. [22] 288 Or. 59 , 602 P.2d 272 (1979). [23] 602 P.2d at 278-79. [24] 602 P.2d at 272. [25] State v. Neal, 150 Or.App. 231 , 945 P.2d 637 (1997); State v. Charboneau, 323 Or. 38 , 913 P.2d 308 (1996) (en banc); State v. Simonsen, 319 Or. 510 , 878 P.2d 409 (1994) (en banc); State v. Isom, 306 Or. 587 , 761 P.2d 524 (1988). [26] Charboneau, 913 P.2d at 318-19 . [27] Hanson, 401 N.W.2d at 778 . [28] Tilley, 963 P.2d at 614 (citation omitted). [29] 696 S.W.2d at 569 . [30] Id. at 570 . [31] Id. at 569 . [32

11999–1999
State v. Simonsen green
or · 1994
2 sentences

1999State v. Beck, 687 S.W.2d 155 (1985). [21] ABA Standards for Criminal Justice 5-5.1, 5-7.1. [22] 288 Or. 59 , 602 P.2d 272 (1979). [23] 602 P.2d at 278-79. [24] 602 P.2d at 272. [25] State v. Neal, 150 Or.App. 231 , 945 P.2d 637 (1997); State v. Charboneau, 323 Or. 38 , 913 P.2d 308 (1996) (en banc); State v. Simonsen, 319 Or. 510 , 878 P.2d 409 (1994) (en banc); State v. Isom, 306 Or. 587 , 761 P.2d 524 (1988). [26] Charboneau, 913 P.2d at 318-19 . [27] Hanson, 401 N.W.2d at 778 . [28] Tilley, 963 P.2d at 614 (citation omitted). [29] 696 S.W.2d at 569 . [30] Id. at 570 . [31] Id. at 569 . [32

1999State v. Beck, 687 S.W.2d 155 (1985). [21] ABA Standards for Criminal Justice 5-5.1, 5-7.1. [22] 288 Or. 59 , 602 P.2d 272 (1979). [23] 602 P.2d at 278-79. [24] 602 P.2d at 272. [25] State v. Neal, 150 Or.App. 231 , 945 P.2d 637 (1997); State v. Charboneau, 323 Or. 38 , 913 P.2d 308 (1996) (en banc); State v. Simonsen, 319 Or. 510 , 878 P.2d 409 (1994) (en banc); State v. Isom, 306 Or. 587 , 761 P.2d 524 (1988). [26] Charboneau, 913 P.2d at 318-19 . [27] Hanson, 401 N.W.2d at 778 . [28] Tilley, 963 P.2d at 614 (citation omitted). [29] 696 S.W.2d at 569 . [30] Id. at 570 . [31] Id. at 569 . [32

11999–1999
State v. Waggoner green
idahoctapp · 1993
2 sentences

1999The same situation appears to apply to State v. Hickman, 175 W.Va. 709 , 338 S.E.2d 188 (1985) (cited by the State). [17] Commonwealth v. Cryer, 426 Mass. 562 , 689 N.E.2d 808 (1998) (finding no federal violation under Burbine ; specifically does not decide whether state constitution violated since that issue was not presented under facts of case); State v. Gibson, 342 N.C. 142 , 463 S.E.2d 193 (1995) (relying on Reese, below, for federal question and holding failure to inform juvenile of parents' and attorney's presence does not violate state juvenile rights statute); State v. Reese, 319 N.C.

1999The same situation appears to apply to State v. Hickman, 175 W.Va. 709 , 338 S.E.2d 188 (1985) (cited by the State). [17] Commonwealth v. Cryer, 426 Mass. 562 , 689 N.E.2d 808 (1998) (finding no federal violation under Burbine ; specifically does not decide whether state constitution violated since that issue was not presented under facts of case); State v. Gibson, 342 N.C. 142 , 463 S.E.2d 193 (1995) (relying on Reese, below, for federal question and holding failure to inform juvenile of parents' and attorney's presence does not violate state juvenile rights statute); State v. Reese, 319 N.C.

11999–1999
De Graff v. State green
oklacrimapp · 1909
2 sentences

1990To the extent the rationale of Merry v. State, 766 P.2d 1377 (Okl.Cr. 1988); Corley v. State, 713 P.2d 12 (Okl.Cr. 1986); Guthrey v. State, 507 P.2d 556 (Okl.Cr. 1973) and Mills v. State, 594 P.2d 374 (Okl.Cr. 1979) is inconsistent with this opinion, they are hereby expressly overruled, and we continue to adhere to our decisions in DeGraff v. State, 2 Okl.Cr. 519 , 103 P. 538 (1909) and Long, Supra, as to the proper interpretation of the Oklahoma Constitution.

1990To the extent the rationale of Merry v. State, 766 P.2d 1377 (Okl.Cr. 1988); Corley v. State, 713 P.2d 12 (Okl.Cr. 1986); Guthrey v. State, 507 P.2d 556 (Okl.Cr. 1973) and Mills v. State, 594 P.2d 374 (Okl.Cr. 1979) is inconsistent with this opinion, they are hereby expressly overruled, and we continue to adhere to our decisions in DeGraff v. State, 2 Okl.Cr. 519 , 103 P. 538 (1909) and Long, Supra, as to the proper interpretation of the Oklahoma Constitution.

11990–1990
Long v. State green
oklacrimapp · 1985
11990–1990
Guthrey v. State green
oklacrimapp · 1973
11990–1990
Mills v. State green
oklacrimapp · 1979
11990–1990
Merry v. State green
oklacrimapp · 1988
11990–1990
Corley v. State green
oklacrimapp · 1985
2 sentences

1990To the extent the rationale of Merry v. State, 766 P.2d 1377 (Okl.Cr. 1988); Corley v. State, 713 P.2d 12 (Okl.Cr. 1986); Guthrey v. State, 507 P.2d 556 (Okl.Cr. 1973) and Mills v. State, 594 P.2d 374 (Okl.Cr. 1979) is inconsistent with this opinion, they are hereby expressly overruled, and we continue to adhere to our decisions in DeGraff v. State, 2 Okl.Cr. 519 , 103 P. 538 (1909) and Long, Supra, as to the proper interpretation of the Oklahoma Constitution.

1990To the extent the rationale of Merry v. State, 766 P.2d 1377 (Okl.Cr.1988); Corley v. State, 713 P.2d 12 (Okl.Cr.1986); Guthrey v. State, 507 P.2d 556 (Okl.Cr.1973) and Mills v. State, 594 P.2d 374 (Okl.Cr.1979) is inconsistent with this opinion, they are hereby expressly overruled, and we continue to adhere to our decisions in DeGraffv.

11990–1990
Rowe v. State green
oklacrimapp · 1987
11988–1988
Teague v. State neutral
oklacrimapp · 1984
11988–1988
Illinois v. Gates green
scotus · 1983
11987–1987
Manson v. Brathwaite green
scotus · 1977
11979–1979

Where else courts name it

PA 637 (1972–2026) OH 386 (1984–2026) TX 297 (1971–2026) NC 184 (1978–2026) IL 177 (1974–2026) NJ 170 (1983–2026) CA 157 (1977–2026) TN 143 (1971–2026) LA 106 (1978–2025) MN 100 (1983–2026) GA 99 (1976–2026) WA 94 (1982–2026) WI 92 (1973–2026) AL 92 (1977–2025) CO 89 (1981–2026) FL 89 (1981–2025) KS 82 (1976–2026) MD 79 (1975–2026) ID 78 (1979–2026) VA 76 (1986–2026) MI 74 (1970–2026) CT 71 (1982–2026) MS 58 (1985–2026) ND 57 (1988–2023) IN 54 (1983–2026) UT 48 (1980–2026) IA 47 (1970–2026) MT 43 (1984–2024) AR 41 (1983–2024) ME 40 (1979–2022) MO 39 (1966–2025) MA 36 (1983–2026) NE 36 (1983–2026) AZ 35 (1982–2026) DE 34 (1978–2026) NM 33 (1990–2026) SC 32 (1985–2023) HI 32 (1994–2025) NH 32 (1980–2023) KY 31 (1999–2026) DC 28 (1976–2026) RI 26 (1984–2026) SD 25 (1980–2019) NY 24 (1981–2025) VT 22 (1987–2023) NV 20 (1986–2026) OR 20 (1996–2026) WY 11 (1988–2022) WV 11 (1978–2021) OK 8 (1979–2021) AK 6 (1987–2019) VI 3 (2009–2026)

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