8 Tennessee opinions name it 1 courts 2005–2025 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Tennessee 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 |
|---|---|---|
United States v. Powellgreen2 sentences2015Further, the Powell Court noted that the Dunn rule “embodies a prudent acknowledgment of a number of factors.” First, “inconsistent verdicts -- even verdicts that acquit on a predicate offense while convicting on the compound offense -- should not be necessarily interpreted as a windfall to the Government at the defendant‟s expense.” Powell, 469 U.S. at 65 (emphasis added). 2015Further, the Powell Court noted that the Dunn rule “embodies a prudent acknowledgment of a number of factors.” First, “inconsistent verdicts -- even verdicts that acquit on a predicate offense while convicting on the compound offense -- should not be necessarily interpreted as a windfall to the Government at the defendant‟s expense.” Powell, 469 U.S. at 65 (emphasis added). | 3 | 6 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Prier
green
2 sentences2014Although Tennessee courts have not adopted these Dunn factors, they similarly define the extent of the curtilage under article I, section 7 of the Tennessee Constitution as “‘the area around the home to which the activity of home life extends.’” Prier, 725 S.W.2d at 670 -71 (quoting Oliver v. United States, 466 U.S. 170 , 182 n.12 (1984)). 2012Although Tennessee courts have not adopted these Dunn factors, they similarly define the extent of the curtilage under article I, section 7 of the Tennessee Constitution as “‘the area around the home to which the activity of home life extends.’” Prier, 725 S.W.2d at 670 -71 (quoting Oliver v. United States, 466 U.S. 170 , 182 n.12 (1984)). | 2 | 2012–2014 |
Oliver v. United States
green
2 sentences2014Although Tennessee courts have not adopted these Dunn factors, they similarly define the extent of the curtilage under article I, section 7 of the Tennessee Constitution as “‘the area around the home to which the activity of home life extends.’” Prier, 725 S.W.2d at 670 -71 (quoting Oliver v. United States, 466 U.S. 170 , 182 n.12 (1984)). 2012Although Tennessee courts have not adopted these Dunn factors, they similarly define the extent of the curtilage under article I, section 7 of the Tennessee Constitution as “‘the area around the home to which the activity of home life extends.’” Prier, 725 S.W.2d at 670 -71 (quoting Oliver v. United States, 466 U.S. 170 , 182 n.12 (1984)). | 2 | 2012–2014 |
Dunn v. United States
green
2 sentences2013The court declined to disturb the defendant’s nuisance conviction, observing that “[e]ach count in an indictment is regarded as if it was a separate indictment.” Id. (citation omitted). -9- The Dunn rule continues to rest “on a sound rationale” that reflects a “recognition of the jury’s historic function, in criminal trials, as a check against arbitrary or oppressive exercises of power by the executive government.” Powell, 469 U.S. at 65 . 2013The court declined to disturb the defendant’s nuisance conviction, observing that “[e]ach count in an indictment is regarded as if it was a separate indictment.” Id. (citation omitted). -9- The Dunn rule continues to rest “on a sound rationale” that reflects a “recognition of the jury’s historic function, in criminal trials, as a check against arbitrary or oppressive exercises of power by the executive government.” Powell, 469 U.S. at 65 . | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.