Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
7 Iowa opinions name it 2 courts 2002–2025 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Iowa 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 |
|---|---|---|
Satterwhite v. Texasgreen2 sentences2025Cf. Satterwhite v. Texas, 486 U.S. 249, 257 (1998) (holding the automatic-reversal rule applies only when “the deprivation of the right to counsel affected—and contaminated—the entire criminal proceeding,” not “where the evil caused by the Sixth Amendment violation is limited to the erroneous admission of particular evidence at trial”). 2024Yet Penson did not disturb Satterwhite v. Texas, in which the Supreme Court held 15 that the automatic reversal rule applied only when “the deprivation of the right to counsel affected—and contaminated—the entire criminal proceeding.” 486 U.S. 249, 257 (1988). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Hensleygreen1 sentence2024Harmless-error analysis is permitted “where the evil caused by a Sixth Amendment violation is limited to the erroneous admission of particular evidence at trial.” Id.; see State v. Hensley, 534 N.W.2d 379, 382 (Iowa 1995) (applying harmless-error analysis to admission of evidence in violation of Hensley’s Sixth Amendment right to counsel). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Elliottgreen1 sentence2017See State v. Tyler, 122 Iowa 125, 130 , 97 N.W. 983, 985 (1904); State v. Hunter, 118 Iowa 686, 690-91 , 92 N.W. 872, 873 (1902); State v. Elliott, 45 Iowa 486, 487 (1877). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Huntergreen2 sentences2017See State v. Tyler, 122 Iowa 125, 130 , 97 N.W. 983, 985 (1904); State v. Hunter, 118 Iowa 686, 690-91 , 92 N.W. 872, 873 (1902); State v. Elliott, 45 Iowa 486, 487 (1877). 2017See State v. Tyler, 122 Iowa 125, 130 , 97 N.W. 983, 985 (1904); State v. Hunter, 118 Iowa 686, 690-91 , 92 N.W. 872, 873 (1902); State v. Elliott, 45 Iowa 486, 487 (1877). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Tylergreen2 sentences2017See State v. Tyler, 122 Iowa 125, 130 , 97 N.W. 983, 985 (1904); State v. Hunter, 118 Iowa 686, 690-91 , 92 N.W. 872, 873 (1902); State v. Elliott, 45 Iowa 486, 487 (1877). 2017See State v. Tyler, 122 Iowa 125, 130 , 97 N.W. 983, 985 (1904); State v. Hunter, 118 Iowa 686, 690-91 , 92 N.W. 872, 873 (1902); State v. Elliott, 45 Iowa 486, 487 (1877). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Smithermangreen2 sentences2014Id. at 348 . 2014Even if the automatic reversal rule adopted by the court in Watson regarding concurrent representation under our Iowa Constitution has not survived (see Smitherman, 733 N.W.2d at 347 (noting the Watson rule may still stand under the Iowa Constitution and distinguishing Smitherman’s conflict from Watson’s by important factors such as inquiry by the court, prophylactic remedy, and acquiescence by the defendant)), the conflict here infected the entire pretrial and preparation period during defense counsel’s eighty days of concurrent representation. | 1 | 1 |
Rivera v. Illinoisgreen2 sentences2012See Rivera, 556 U.S. at 161-62 , 129 S.Ct. at 1456 , 173 L.Ed.2d at 331 . 2012See Rivera, 556 U.S. at 161-62 , 129 S.Ct. at 1456 , 173 L.Ed.2d at 331 . | 1 | 1 |
Black v. New Yorkgreen2 sentences2012See People v. Hecker, 15 N.Y.3d 625 , 917 N.Y.S.2d 39 , 942 N.E.2d 248, 271-72 (2010), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 131 S.Ct. 2117 , 179 L.Ed.2d 911 (2011); Hampton, 928 N.E.2d at 927 . 2012See People v. Hecker, 942 N.E.2d 248 , 271–72 (N.Y. 2010), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 131 S. Ct. 2117 , 179 L. | 1 | 1 |
Hill v. Muwwakkilgreen2 sentences2012See People v. Hecker, 15 N.Y.3d 625 , 917 N.Y.S.2d 39 , 942 N.E.2d 248, 271-72 (2010), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 131 S.Ct. 2117 , 179 L.Ed.2d 911 (2011); Hampton, 928 N.E.2d at 927 . 2012See People v. Hecker, 942 N.E.2d 248 , 271–72 (N.Y. 2010), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 131 S. Ct. 2117 , 179 L. | 1 | 1 |
Angus v. Stategreen2 sentences2012See, e.g., State v. McLean, 815 A.2d 799, 805 (Me.2002); Angus v. State, 695 N.W.2d 109, 118 (Minn.2005); State v. Vreen, 143 Wash.2d 923 , 26 P.3d 236, 238-40 (2001). 2012See, e.g., State v. McLean, 815 A.2d 799, 805 (Me. 2002); Angus v. State, 695 N.W.2d 109, 118 (Minn. 2005); State v. Vreen, 26 P.3d 236 , 238–40 (Wash. 2001). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Vreengreen2 sentences2012See, e.g., State v. McLean, 815 A.2d 799, 805 (Me.2002); Angus v. State, 695 N.W.2d 109, 118 (Minn.2005); State v. Vreen, 143 Wash.2d 923 , 26 P.3d 236, 238-40 (2001). 2012See, e.g., State v. McLean, 815 A.2d 799, 805 (Me. 2002); Angus v. State, 695 N.W.2d 109, 118 (Minn. 2005); State v. Vreen, 26 P.3d 236 , 238–40 (Wash. 2001). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Heckergreen2 sentences2012See People v. Hecker, 15 N.Y.3d 625 , 917 N.Y.S.2d 39 , 942 N.E.2d 248, 271-72 (2010), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 131 S.Ct. 2117 , 179 L.Ed.2d 911 (2011); Hampton, 928 N.E.2d at 927 . 2012See People v. Hecker, 15 N.Y.3d 625 , 917 N.Y.S.2d 39 , 942 N.E.2d 248, 271-72 (2010), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 131 S.Ct. 2117 , 179 L.Ed.2d 911 (2011); Hampton, 928 N.E.2d at 927 . | 1 | 1 |
State v. McLeangreen2 sentences2012See, e.g., State v. McLean, 815 A.2d 799, 805 (Me.2002); Angus v. State, 695 N.W.2d 109, 118 (Minn.2005); State v. Vreen, 143 Wash.2d 923 , 26 P.3d 236, 238-40 (2001). 2012See, e.g., State v. McLean, 815 A.2d 799, 805 (Me. 2002); Angus v. State, 695 N.W.2d 109, 118 (Minn. 2005); State v. Vreen, 26 P.3d 236 , 238–40 (Wash. 2001). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Iowa. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State of Iowa v. Jerin Douglas Mootz
green
2 sentences2020Mootz adopted “an automatic reversal rule” under which prejudice is presumed when an “erroneous ruling on a reverse-Batson challenge[6] leads to the denial of one of the defendant’s peremptory challenges.” 808 N.W.2d at 226 . 2017Id. at 225 . | 2 | 2017–2020 |
State v. Neuendorf
green
2 sentences2017We asserted that since Ross, nineteen ■jurisdictions had “refused to apply an automatic reversal rule of the type that .we previously recognized ■ in Beckwith.” Neuendorf, 509 N.W.2d at 747 . 2 We con-eluded the existence of prejudice was “too speculative to justify overturning the:verdict of the jury” where the juror who should have been stricken for cause was removed from the jury through exercise of a peremptory challenge by the defendant. 2017Id. at 746-47 . | 1 | 2017–2017 |
State v. Vreen
red
1 sentence2012See, e.g., State v. McLean, 815 A.2d 799, 805 (Me.2002); Angus v. State, 695 N.W.2d 109, 118 (Minn.2005); State v. Vreen, 143 Wash.2d 923 , 26 P.3d 236, 238-40 (2001). | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Commonwealth v. Hampton
green
1 sentence2012See People v. Hecker, 15 N.Y.3d 625 , 917 N.Y.S.2d 39 , 942 N.E.2d 248, 271-72 (2010), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 131 S.Ct. 2117 , 179 L.Ed.2d 911 (2011); Hampton, 928 N.E.2d at 927 . | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Mickens v. Taylor
green
2 sentences2002Id. at -, 122 S.Ct. at 1244-45 , 152 L.Ed.2d at-. (citations omitted). 2002Id. at -, 122 S.Ct. at 1244-45 , 152 L.Ed.2d at-. (citations omitted). | 1 | 2002–2002 |
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.