7 Wyoming opinions name it 1 courts 1981–2025 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
Samuel Joseph Barrett v. The State of Wyominggreen2 sentences2025Under the statute, “knowingly” means “with awareness, deliberateness, or intention as distinguished from inadvertently or involuntarily.” Barrett v. State, 2022 WY 64, ¶ 36 , 509 P.3d 940, 948 (Wyo. 2022) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). [¶15] Before trial, Mr. Iverson and the State requested the district court give the pattern jury instruction on the elements of reproducing child pornography as charged in Count I. 2025Under the statute, “knowingly” means “with awareness, deliberateness, or intention as distinguished from inadvertently or involuntarily.” Barrett v. State, 2022 WY 64, ¶ 36 , 509 P.3d 940, 948 (Wyo. 2022) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). [¶15] Before trial, Mr. Iverson and the State requested the district court give the pattern jury instruction on the elements of reproducing child pornography as charged in Count I. | 2 | 2 |
Sean Wayne Weston v. The State of Wyominggreen2 sentences2024To prove an attempted crime, the State must therefore prove two elements: 1) “the defendant had the specific intent to complete the crime;” and 2) the defendant “took a substantial step to achieve that result.” Weston v. State, 2019 WY 113, ¶ 14 , 451 P.3d 758, 763 (Wyo. 2019) (citing Pearson v. State, 2017 WY 19, ¶¶ 19-20 , 389 P.3d 794, 798-99 (Wyo. 2017)). [¶14] Before trial, the State submitted a pattern jury instruction defining an attempted crime. 2024To prove an attempted crime, the State must therefore prove two elements: 1) “the defendant had the specific intent to complete the crime;” and 2) the defendant “took a substantial step to achieve that result.” Weston v. State, 2019 WY 113, ¶ 14 , 451 P.3d 758, 763 (Wyo. 2019) (citing Pearson v. State, 2017 WY 19, ¶¶ 19-20 , 389 P.3d 794, 798-99 (Wyo. 2017)). [¶14] Before trial, the State submitted a pattern jury instruction defining an attempted crime. | 1 | 1 |
James E. Pearson v. Stategreen2 sentences2024To prove an attempted crime, the State must therefore prove two elements: 1) “the defendant had the specific intent to complete the crime;” and 2) the defendant “took a substantial step to achieve that result.” Weston v. State, 2019 WY 113, ¶ 14 , 451 P.3d 758, 763 (Wyo. 2019) (citing Pearson v. State, 2017 WY 19, ¶¶ 19-20 , 389 P.3d 794, 798-99 (Wyo. 2017)). [¶14] Before trial, the State submitted a pattern jury instruction defining an attempted crime. 2024To prove an attempted crime, the State must therefore prove two elements: 1) “the defendant had the specific intent to complete the crime;” and 2) the defendant “took a substantial step to achieve that result.” Weston v. State, 2019 WY 113, ¶ 14 , 451 P.3d 758, 763 (Wyo. 2019) (citing Pearson v. State, 2017 WY 19, ¶¶ 19-20 , 389 P.3d 794, 798-99 (Wyo. 2017)). [¶14] Before trial, the State submitted a pattern jury instruction defining an attempted crime. | 1 | 1 |
Braley v. Stategreen1 sentence2003The “old” pattern jury instruction, W.Cr.P.J.I. 7.106 (1978), and the new pattern jury instruction, W.Cr.P.J.I. 21.01D (1996), contain both concepts. 2 The problem is that the concepts are not identical, leaving considerable doubt as to exactly what it is the State has to prove in a given ease. 3 Perhaps recognizing this difficulty, the source note to the new pattern instruction directs attention to Braley v. State, 741 P.2d 1061, 1069 (Wyo.1987), where this Court, in a homicide case, said simply that “[mjalice has been defined as intentional killing without legal justification or excuse and u | 1 | 1 |
Nunez v. Stategreen1 sentence2003The “old” pattern jury instruction, W.Cr.P.J.I. 7.106 (1978), and the new pattern jury instruction, W.Cr.P.J.I. 21.01D (1996), contain both concepts. 2 The problem is that the concepts are not identical, leaving considerable doubt as to exactly what it is the State has to prove in a given ease. 3 Perhaps recognizing this difficulty, the source note to the new pattern instruction directs attention to Braley v. State, 741 P.2d 1061, 1069 (Wyo.1987), where this Court, in a homicide case, said simply that “[mjalice has been defined as intentional killing without legal justification or excuse and u | 1 | 1 |
Armstrong v. Stategreen1 sentence2003In Armstrong v. State, 826 P.2d 1106, 1113-14 (Wyo.1992), we noted the confusion that can arise because of differing legal and common definitions of malice, yet we also cited Sorrentino with approval and noted that the passage of six decades had “failed to endow our language with suitable synonyms.” [¶23] In Dean v. State, 668 P.2d 639, 642-43 (Wyo.1983), we considered the meaning of the word “maliciously” specifically within the context of the first-degree arson statute. | 1 | 1 |
Van Dean v. Stategreen1 sentence2003In Armstrong v. State, 826 P.2d 1106, 1113-14 (Wyo.1992), we noted the confusion that can arise because of differing legal and common definitions of malice, yet we also cited Sorrentino with approval and noted that the passage of six decades had “failed to endow our language with suitable synonyms.” [¶23] In Dean v. State, 668 P.2d 639, 642-43 (Wyo.1983), we considered the meaning of the word “maliciously” specifically within the context of the first-degree arson statute. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Wyoming. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
South Cheyenne Water & Sewer District v. Stundon
green
1 sentence2007Given our conclusion that the jury could consider the "reasonable cost of repair or restoration," South Cheyenne Water & Sewer Dist., 483 P.2d at 243 , it might have been appropriate for the trial court to insert the word "reasonable" in the instructions concerning value. | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Pike v. State
green
1 sentence1984Ostrowski v. State, Wyo., 665 P.2d 471 (1983); Phillips v. State, Wyo., 553 P.2d 1037 (1976); Miller v. State, Wyo., 508 P.2d 1207 (1973); Pike v. State, Wyo., 495 P.2d 1188 (1972); Filbert v. State, Wyo., 436 P.2d 959 (1968). | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Ostrowski v. State
green
1 sentence1984Ostrowski v. State, Wyo., 665 P.2d 471 (1983); Phillips v. State, Wyo., 553 P.2d 1037 (1976); Miller v. State, Wyo., 508 P.2d 1207 (1973); Pike v. State, Wyo., 495 P.2d 1188 (1972); Filbert v. State, Wyo., 436 P.2d 959 (1968). | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Filbert v. State
green
1 sentence1984Ostrowski v. State, Wyo., 665 P.2d 471 (1983); Phillips v. State, Wyo., 553 P.2d 1037 (1976); Miller v. State, Wyo., 508 P.2d 1207 (1973); Pike v. State, Wyo., 495 P.2d 1188 (1972); Filbert v. State, Wyo., 436 P.2d 959 (1968). | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Phillips v. State
green
1 sentence1984Ostrowski v. State, Wyo., 665 P.2d 471 (1983); Phillips v. State, Wyo., 553 P.2d 1037 (1976); Miller v. State, Wyo., 508 P.2d 1207 (1973); Pike v. State, Wyo., 495 P.2d 1188 (1972); Filbert v. State, Wyo., 436 P.2d 959 (1968). | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Miller v. State
neutral
1 sentence1984Ostrowski v. State, Wyo., 665 P.2d 471 (1983); Phillips v. State, Wyo., 553 P.2d 1037 (1976); Miller v. State, Wyo., 508 P.2d 1207 (1973); Pike v. State, Wyo., 495 P.2d 1188 (1972); Filbert v. State, Wyo., 436 P.2d 959 (1968). | 1 | 1984–1984 |
People v. Conley
green
2 sentences1981People v. Conley, 64 Cal.2d 310 , 49 Cal. Rptr. 815 , 411 P.2d 911 (1966); Carter v. State, supra ; State v. Mercer, supra . 1981People v. Conley, 64 Cal.2d 310 , 49 Cal. Rptr. 815 , 411 P.2d 911 (1966); Carter v. State, supra ; State v. Mercer, supra . | 1 | 1981–1981 |
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.