8 Wyoming opinions name it 1 courts 1970–2011 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 |
|---|---|---|
Mills v. Peoplegreen2 sentences2011The rationale for that rule has been stated as follows. "`The impact upon the minds of the jurors of a refusal to submit to something which they might well assume would effectively determine guilt or innocence, under these conditions, might well be more devastating than a disclosure of the results of such test * * *.'" Id. (quoting Mills v. People, 139 Colo. 397 , 339 P.2d 998, 999 (Colo.1959)). 2011The rationale for that rule has been stated as follows. "`The impact upon the minds of the jurors of a refusal to submit to something which they might well assume would effectively determine guilt or innocence, under these conditions, might well be more devastating than a disclosure of the results of such test * * *.'" Id. (quoting Mills v. People, 139 Colo. 397 , 339 P.2d 998, 999 (Colo.1959)). | 2 | 3 |
Smith v. STATE EX REL. DEPT. OF TRANSP.green1 sentence2007See, e.g., Bradshaw, ¶ 25, 135 P.3d at 619-20; Smith, 11 P.3d at 935-36. | 1 | 1 |
Buckles v. Stategreen1 sentence1997In Buckles v. State, 830 P.2d 702, 704 (Wyo.1992), the results of the test administered one to one and one-half hours after a collision were used as evidence of intoxication to achieve a conviction. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Kolandergreen2 sentences1986The evidence of refusal was admitted as showing “consciousness of guilt.” After declining to set forth the “sordid details” of the crime for which defendant was convicted of first degree murder, the appellate court stated (quoting from State v. Kolander, 236 Minn. 209 , 52 N.W.2d 458, 465 (1952): “ ‘The impact upon the minds of the jurors of a refusal to submit to something which they might well assume would effectively determine guilt or innocence, under these conditions, might well be more devastating than a disclosure of the results of such test ***.”’ Id. 339 P.2d at 999 . 1986The evidence of refusal was admitted as showing “consciousness of guilt.” After declining to set forth the “sordid details” of the crime for which defendant was convicted of first degree murder, the appellate court stated (quoting from State v. Kolander, 236 Minn. 209 , 52 N.W.2d 458, 465 (1952): “ ‘The impact upon the minds of the jurors of a refusal to submit to something which they might well assume would effectively determine guilt or innocence, under these conditions, might well be more devastating than a disclosure of the results of such test ***.”’ Id. 339 P.2d at 999 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Wyoming. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Schmunk v. State
green
2 sentences2011The rationale for that rule has been stated as follows. "'The impact upon the minds of the jurors of a refusal to submit to something which they might well assume would effectively determine guilt or innocence, under these conditions, might well be more devastating than a disclosure of the results of such test * * */" Id. (quoting Mills v. People, 139 Colo. 397 , 339 P.2d 998, 999 (Colo.1959)). 2011The rationale for that rule has been stated as follows. "`The impact upon the minds of the jurors of a refusal to submit to something which they might well assume would effectively determine guilt or innocence, under these conditions, might well be more devastating than a disclosure of the results of such test * * *.'" Id. (quoting Mills v. People, 139 Colo. 397 , 339 P.2d 998, 999 (Colo.1959)). | 2 | 2008–2011 |
Hampton v. State
green
2 sentences1977The record reveals this assertion was not raised or even suggested to the trial court, thus we cannot reach it on appeal, Hampton v. State, Wyo., 558 P.2d 504, 507 , and cases cited. 1977The record reveals this assertion was not raised or even suggested to the trial court, thus we cannot reach it on appeal, Hampton v. State, Wyo., 558 P.2d 504, 507 , and cases cited. | 1 | 1977–1977 |
Ramirez v. State
green
1 sentence1975Appellant is foreclosed from this contention by virtue of this stipulation : “(2) The blood sample of Angelo [sic] Hugh Moore taken November 19, 1973, was delivered to Donald Lee, a qualified expert in blood-alcohol testing, at the Wyoming State Laboratory, who tested the sample in accordance with the established procedures of his office. “(3) The report of that test, as represented by the Blood Collection Report and Report of Laboratory Examinations showing the sample taken from the defendant, contained .23% alcohol by weight.” He then proceeds to the conclusion, in sole reliance upon Ramirez | 1 | 1975–1975 |
Ramirez v. State
green
1 sentence1975Appellant is foreclosed from this contention by virtue of this stipulation : “(2) The blood sample of Angelo [sic] Hugh Moore taken November 19, 1973, was delivered to Donald Lee, a qualified expert in blood-alcohol testing, at the Wyoming State Laboratory, who tested the sample in accordance with the established procedures of his office. “(3) The report of that test, as represented by the Blood Collection Report and Report of Laboratory Examinations showing the sample taken from the defendant, contained .23% alcohol by weight.” He then proceeds to the conclusion, in sole reliance upon Ramirez | 1 | 1975–1975 |
In Re GAULT
green
2 sentences1970Instead, the parties have assumed to discuss aspects of In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1 , 87 S.Ct. 1428 , 18 L.Ed. 2d 527 , and deal in generalities regarding the concept of juvenile delinquency proceedings. 1970Instead, the parties have assumed to discuss aspects of In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1 , 87 S.Ct. 1428 , 18 L.Ed. 2d 527 , and deal in generalities regarding the concept of juvenile delinquency proceedings. | 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.