7 Alabama opinions name it 2 courts 1991–2017 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Alabama 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 |
|---|---|---|
New York v. Harrisgreen2 sentences2010As stated above, in Harris, 495 U.S. at 21 , the United States Supreme Court limited Pay- ton and held that “where the police have probable cause to arrest a suspect, the exclusionary rule does not bar the State’s use of a statement made by the defendant outside of his home, even though the statement is taken after an arrest made in the home in violation of Payton.” See also Ex parte Rieber, 663 So.2d at 1002-03 ; Williams, 830 So.2d at 50 . 2002In addition, the United States Supreme Court held in New York v. Harris , 495 U.S. 14 (1990), that "where the police have probable cause to arrest a suspect, the exclusionary rule does not bar the State's use of a statement made by the defendant outside of his home, even though the statement is taken after an arrest made in the home in violation of Payton ." Harris , 495 U.S. at 21 . | 2 | 6 |
Richard Masone v. City of Aventuragreen1 sentence2017Thus, I adhere to my view that our recent jurisprudence “unnecessarily broadens the Court’s interpretation of legislative preemption, while, at the same time, limiting the home rule authority granted to municipal governments by the Florida Constitution.” Id. at 499 (Pariente, J., dissenting). | 1 | 1 |
Ex Parte Parkergreen1 sentence2002See also Parker v. State , 587 So.2d 1072 , 1088 (Ala.Crim.App. 1991), aff'd, 610 So.2d 1181 (Ala. 1992), cert. denied, 509 U.S. 929 (1993). | 1 | 1 |
Parker v. Stategreen1 sentence2002See also Parker v. State , 587 So.2d 1072 , 1088 (Ala.Crim.App. 1991), aff'd, 610 So.2d 1181 (Ala. 1992), cert. denied, 509 U.S. 929 (1993). | 1 | 1 |
West v. Truman Medical Center West, Inc.green1 sentence2002See also Parker v. State , 587 So.2d 1072 , 1088 (Ala.Crim.App. 1991), aff'd, 610 So.2d 1181 (Ala. 1992), cert. denied, 509 U.S. 929 (1993). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Ex Parte Rieber
green
1 sentence2010As stated above, in Harris, 495 U.S. at 21 , the United States Supreme Court limited Pay- ton and held that “where the police have probable cause to arrest a suspect, the exclusionary rule does not bar the State’s use of a statement made by the defendant outside of his home, even though the statement is taken after an arrest made in the home in violation of Payton.” See also Ex parte Rieber, 663 So.2d at 1002-03 ; Williams, 830 So.2d at 50 . | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Williams v. State
green
1 sentence2010As stated above, in Harris, 495 U.S. at 21 , the United States Supreme Court limited Pay- ton and held that “where the police have probable cause to arrest a suspect, the exclusionary rule does not bar the State’s use of a statement made by the defendant outside of his home, even though the statement is taken after an arrest made in the home in violation of Payton.” See also Ex parte Rieber, 663 So.2d at 1002-03 ; Williams, 830 So.2d at 50 . | 1 | 2010–2010 |
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.