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 Rhode Island opinions name it 1 courts 1980–2007 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Rhode Island 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 |
|---|---|---|
Oyler v. Bolesgreen2 sentences2002The Court emphasized that exercising some selectivity in enforcement does not violate the Constitution unless the selection was “based upon an unjustifiable standard such as race, religion or other arbitrary classification.” Id. at 364 , 98 S.Ct. at 668-69 , 54 L.Ed.2d at 611 -12 (quoting Oyler v. Boles, 368 U.S. 448, 456 , 82 S.Ct. 501, 506 , 7 L.Ed.2d 446, 453 (1962)). 2002The Court emphasized that exercising some selectivity in enforcement does not violate the Constitution unless the selection was “based upon an unjustifiable standard such as race, religion or other arbitrary classification.” Id. at 364 , 98 S.Ct. at 668-69 , 54 L.Ed.2d at 611 -12 (quoting Oyler v. Boles, 368 U.S. 448, 456 , 82 S.Ct. 501, 506 , 7 L.Ed.2d 446, 453 (1962)). | 2 | 3 |
State v. Riccigreen2 sentences2007To prevail on an allegation of selective prosecution, the defendant must prove two elements: (1) “that the challenged enforcement has both a discriminatory effect” and (2) that the prosecution was “ ‘deliberately based upon an unjustifiable standard such as race, religion, or some other arbitrary classification.’” Ricci, 704 A.2d at 211 (quoting Wayte, 470 U.S. at 608 , 105 S.Ct. 1524 ). 1998“Following Wayte , a claim of selective prosecution can prevail only if the defendant can prove that the challenged enforcement has both a discriminatory éffect and is ‘deliberately based upon an unjustifiable standard such as race, religion, or some other arbitrary classification * * * including the exercise of protected statutory and constitutional rights.’” Ricci , at 211 (quoting Wayte, 470 U.S. at 608 , 105 S.Ct. at 1531 , 84 L.Ed.2d at 556 ). | 1 | 2 |
United States v. Goodwingreen2 sentences1997Following Wayte , a claim of selective prosecution can prevail only if the defendant can prove that the challenged enforcement has both a discriminatory effect and is “deliberately based upon an unjustifiable standard such as race, religion, or some other arbitrary classification,” id. at 608 , 105 S.Ct. at 1581 , 84 L.Ed.2d at 556 (quoting Oyler v. Boles, 368 U.S. 448, 456 , 82 S.Ct. 501, 506 , 7 L.Ed.2d 446, 453 (1962)), “including the exercise of protected statutory and constitutional rights,” Wayte, 470 U.S. at 608 , 105 S.Ct. at 1531 , 84 L.Ed.2d at 556 (citing United States v. Goodwin, 4 1997Following Wayte , a claim of selective prosecution can prevail only if the defendant can prove that the challenged enforcement has both a discriminatory effect and is “deliberately based upon an unjustifiable standard such as race, religion, or some other arbitrary classification,” id. at 608 , 105 S.Ct. at 1581 , 84 L.Ed.2d at 556 (quoting Oyler v. Boles, 368 U.S. 448, 456 , 82 S.Ct. 501, 506 , 7 L.Ed.2d 446, 453 (1962)), “including the exercise of protected statutory and constitutional rights,” Wayte, 470 U.S. at 608 , 105 S.Ct. at 1531 , 84 L.Ed.2d at 556 (citing United States v. Goodwin, 4 | 1 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Rhode Island. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Bordenkircher v. Hayes
green
2 sentences2002The Court emphasized that exercising some selectivity in enforcement does not violate the Constitution unless the selection was “based upon an unjustifiable standard such as race, religion or other arbitrary classification.” Id. at 364 , 98 S.Ct. at 668-69 , 54 L.Ed.2d at 611 -12 (quoting Oyler v. Boles, 368 U.S. 448, 456 , 82 S.Ct. 501, 506 , 7 L.Ed.2d 446, 453 (1962)). 2002The Court emphasized that exercising some selectivity in enforcement does not violate the Constitution unless the selection was “based upon an unjustifiable standard such as race, religion or other arbitrary classification.” Id. at 364 , 98 S.Ct. at 668-69 , 54 L.Ed.2d at 611 -12 (quoting Oyler v. Boles, 368 U.S. 448, 456 , 82 S.Ct. 501, 506 , 7 L.Ed.2d 446, 453 (1962)). | 4 | 1980–2002 |
Wayte v. United States
green
2 sentences2007To prevail on an allegation of selective prosecution, the defendant must prove two elements: (1) “that the challenged enforcement has both a discriminatory effect” and (2) that the prosecution was “ ‘deliberately based upon an unjustifiable standard such as race, religion, or some other arbitrary classification.’” Ricci, 704 A.2d at 211 (quoting Wayte, 470 U.S. at 608 , 105 S.Ct. 1524 ). 2007To prevail on an allegation of selective prosecution, the defendant must prove two elements: (1) “that the challenged enforcement has both a discriminatory effect” and (2) that the prosecution was “ ‘deliberately based upon an unjustifiable standard such as race, religion, or some other arbitrary classification.’” Ricci, 704 A.2d at 211 (quoting Wayte, 470 U.S. at 608 , 105 S.Ct. 1524 ). | 3 | 1997–2007 |
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.