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 Wyoming opinions name it 1 courts 1980–2025 4 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 |
|---|---|---|
cluster 755519green2 sentences2025In fact, the Ninth Circuit recognized “as a rule, special verdicts in criminal trials are not favored.” Id. (quoting United States v. Reed, 147 F.3d 1178, 1180 (9th Cir. 1998)). 2025In fact, the Ninth Circuit recognized “as a rule, special verdicts in criminal trials are not favored.” Id. (quoting United States v. Reed, 147 F.3d 1178 , 1180 (9th Cir. 1998)). | 1 | 2 |
Thompson v. Stategreen2 sentences2023Thompson v. State, 2018 WY 3, ¶ 14 , 408 P.3d 756, 760 (Wyo. 2018) (quoting Mraz v. State, 2016 WY 85, ¶ 19 , 378 P.3d 280, 286 (Wyo. 2016)) (quotation marks and other citations omitted). [T]his Court examines the evidence in the light most favorable to the State. 2023Thompson v. State, 2018 WY 3, ¶ 14 , 408 P.3d 756, 760 (Wyo. 2018) (quoting Mraz v. State, 2016 WY 85, ¶ 19 , 378 P.3d 280, 286 (Wyo. 2016)) (quotation marks and other citations omitted). [T]his Court examines the evidence in the light most favorable to the State. | 1 | 1 |
Miranda Rose Mraz v. Stategreen2 sentences2023Thompson v. State, 2018 WY 3, ¶ 14 , 408 P.3d 756, 760 (Wyo. 2018) (quoting Mraz v. State, 2016 WY 85, ¶ 19 , 378 P.3d 280, 286 (Wyo. 2016)) (quotation marks and other citations omitted). [T]his Court examines the evidence in the light most favorable to the State. 2023Thompson v. State, 2018 WY 3, ¶ 14 , 408 P.3d 756, 760 (Wyo. 2018) (quoting Mraz v. State, 2016 WY 85, ¶ 19 , 378 P.3d 280, 286 (Wyo. 2016)) (quotation marks and other citations omitted). [T]his Court examines the evidence in the light most favorable to the State. | 1 | 1 |
Heywood v. Stategreen2 sentences2022Roberts v. State, 2022 WY 93, ¶ 19 , 513 P.3d 850 , 854–55 (Wyo. 2022) (citations and quotation marks omitted). [¶19] Mr. Walker contends the record clearly reflects that the jury was not properly instructed because the unequivocal law requires the instructions “leave no doubt as to the circumstances under which the crime can be found to have been committed.” Mueller v. State, 2001 WY 134, ¶ 9 , 36 P.3d 1151, 1155 (Wyo. 2001) (citations omitted); Leyva, ¶ 9, 106 P.3d at 876 ; Heywood, ¶¶ 17–33, 170 P.3d at 1232–36. 2022See, e.g., Heywood, 170 P.3d 1227 ; Hoeber v. State, 488 S.W.3d 648, 653 (Mo. 2016) (en banc). | 1 | 1 |
Brown v. Stategreen2 sentences2022Id. at 438–39. [¶49] Mr. Brown also proposed a specific unanimity instruction which read: The defendant is accused of crimes which may be committed in more than one way. 2022See supra ¶ 41 and cases cited therein. [¶53] Other courts have adopted the use of a specific unanimity instruction, such as the instruction recognized in Brown, supra. While “[a] general unanimity instruction informs the jury that the verdict must be unanimous, . . . a specific unanimity instruction indicates to the jury that they must be unanimous as to which specific act constitutes the offense charged.” 75A Am. | 1 | 1 |
Mueller v. Stategreen2 sentences2022Roberts v. State, 2022 WY 93, ¶ 19 , 513 P.3d 850 , 854–55 (Wyo. 2022) (citations and quotation marks omitted). [¶19] Mr. Walker contends the record clearly reflects that the jury was not properly instructed because the unequivocal law requires the instructions “leave no doubt as to the circumstances under which the crime can be found to have been committed.” Mueller v. State, 2001 WY 134, ¶ 9 , 36 P.3d 1151, 1155 (Wyo. 2001) (citations omitted); Leyva, ¶ 9, 106 P.3d at 876 ; Heywood, ¶¶ 17–33, 170 P.3d at 1232–36. 2022Roberts v. State, 2022 WY 93, ¶ 19 , 513 P.3d 850 , 854–55 (Wyo. 2022) (citations and quotation marks omitted). [¶19] Mr. Walker contends the record clearly reflects that the jury was not properly instructed because the unequivocal law requires the instructions “leave no doubt as to the circumstances under which the crime can be found to have been committed.” Mueller v. State, 2001 WY 134, ¶ 9 , 36 P.3d 1151, 1155 (Wyo. 2001) (citations omitted); Leyva, ¶ 9, 106 P.3d at 876 ; Heywood, ¶¶ 17–33, 170 P.3d at 1232–36. | 1 | 1 |
Edward L. Hoeber v. State of Missourigreen1 sentence2022See, e.g., Heywood, 170 P.3d 1227 ; Hoeber v. State, 488 S.W.3d 648, 653 (Mo. 2016) (en banc). | 1 | 1 |
Huffman v. Stategreen2 sentences1992App.3d 74 , 143 Ill.Dec. 761 , 554 N.E.2d 696 (1990), where separate verdicts were used in very recent cases; Huffman v. State, 543 N.E.2d 360 (Ind.1989), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 110 S.Ct. 3257 , 111 L.Ed.2d 767 (1990); Dechaine, 572 A.2d 130 ; and Allard, 557 A.2d 960 . 1992See also Holley, 942 F.2d 916 , where the conviction in a non-homicide case was reversed for failure to give a unanimity instruction; People v. Johnson, 197 Ill.App.3d 74 , 143 Ill.Dec. 761 , 554 N.E.2d 696 (1990), where separate verdicts were used in very recent cases; Huffman v. State, 543 N.E.2d 360 (Ind.1989), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 110 S.Ct. 3257 , 111 L.Ed.2d 767 (1990); Dechaine, 572 A.2d 130 ; and Allard, 557 A.2d 960 . | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Jerry Don Holleygreen2 sentences1992See also Holley, 942 F.2d 916 , where the conviction in a non-homicide case was reversed for failure to give a unanimity instruction; People v. Johnson, 197 Ill. 1992See also Holley, 942 F.2d 916 , where the conviction in a non-homicide case was reversed for failure to give a unanimity instruction; People v. Johnson, 197 Ill.App.3d 74 , 143 Ill.Dec. 761 , 554 N.E.2d 696 (1990), where separate verdicts were used in very recent cases; Huffman v. State, 543 N.E.2d 360 (Ind.1989), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 110 S.Ct. 3257 , 111 L.Ed.2d 767 (1990); Dechaine, 572 A.2d 130 ; and Allard, 557 A.2d 960 . | 1 | 1 |
Royal Crown Cola Co. v. Coca-Cola Co.green2 sentences1992App.3d 74 , 143 Ill.Dec. 761 , 554 N.E.2d 696 (1990), where separate verdicts were used in very recent cases; Huffman v. State, 543 N.E.2d 360 (Ind.1989), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 110 S.Ct. 3257 , 111 L.Ed.2d 767 (1990); Dechaine, 572 A.2d 130 ; and Allard, 557 A.2d 960 . 1992See also Holley, 942 F.2d 916 , where the conviction in a non-homicide case was reversed for failure to give a unanimity instruction; People v. Johnson, 197 Ill.App.3d 74 , 143 Ill.Dec. 761 , 554 N.E.2d 696 (1990), where separate verdicts were used in very recent cases; Huffman v. State, 543 N.E.2d 360 (Ind.1989), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 110 S.Ct. 3257 , 111 L.Ed.2d 767 (1990); Dechaine, 572 A.2d 130 ; and Allard, 557 A.2d 960 . | 1 | 1 |
People v. Hinesgreen2 sentences1981At the Conference of Chief Justices (see notes 6 and 7), Professor Amsterdam concluded and summarized as follows: “ ‘Thus any such substantial error in the penalty trial may have affected the result; it is “reasonably probable” that in the absence of such error “a result more favorable to the appealing party would have been reached.” ’ “People v. Hines [ 61 Cal.2d 164 , 37 Cal.Rptr. 622, 626 ], 390 P.2d 398, 402 ([Cal.] 1964). 1981At the Conference of Chief Justices (see notes 6 and 7), Professor Amsterdam concluded and summarized as follows: “ ‘Thus any such substantial error in the penalty trial may have affected the result; it is “reasonably probable” that in the absence of such error “a result more favorable to the appealing party would have been reached.” ’ “People v. Hines [ 61 Cal.2d 164 , 37 Cal.Rptr. 622, 626 ], 390 P.2d 398, 402 ([Cal.] 1964). | 1 | 1 |
Hibdon v. United Statesgreen2 sentences1980Apodaca (10-2), supra; and Johnson (9-3), supra. The Federal circuit courts reviewing federal prosecutions have reversed convictions on a less-than-unanimous verdict, even where the defendant “waived” the unanimity requirement under the provisions of Rule 23(a) and (b), F.R.Cr.P., fn. 9, supra. Hibdon v. United States, 6 Cir., 204 F.2d 834, 838 (1953) (Unanimity is a procedural requirement but is also inextricably interwoven with the proof-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard); United States v. Lopez, 9 Cir., 581 F.2d 1338, 1340 (1979) (Federal Rules require unanimity: The only alternatives avai 1980Apodaca (10-2), supra; and Johnson (9-3), supra. The Federal circuit courts reviewing federal prosecutions have reversed convictions on a less-than-unanimous verdict, even where the defendant "waived" the unanimity requirement under the provisions of Rule 23(a) and (b), F.R.Cr.P., fn. 9, supra. Hibdon v. United States, 6 Cir., 204 F.2d 834, 838 (1953) (Unanimity is a procedural requirement but is also inextricably interwoven with the proof-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard); United States v. Lopez, 9 Cir., 581 F.2d 1338, 1340 (1979) (Federal Rules require unanimity: The only alternatives avai | 1 | 1 |
cluster 373075green2 sentences1980See, also, United States v. Morris, 10 Cir., 612 F.2d 483 (1979), in which the court said that in federal criminal trials, unanimity is both a procedural and Sixth Amendment, fn. 8, supra, requirement which cannot be waived. 1980See, also, United States v. Morris, 10 Cir., 612 F.2d 483 (1979), in which the court said that in federal criminal trials, unanimity is both a procedural and Sixth Amendment, fn. 8, supra, requirement which cannot be waived. | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Scalzittigreen2 sentences1980Apodaca (10-2), supra; and Johnson (9-3), supra. The Federal circuit courts reviewing federal prosecutions have reversed convictions on a less-than-unanimous verdict, even where the defendant “waived” the unanimity requirement under the provisions of Rule 23(a) and (b), F.R.Cr.P., fn. 9, supra. Hibdon v. United States, 6 Cir., 204 F.2d 834, 838 (1953) (Unanimity is a procedural requirement but is also inextricably interwoven with the proof-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard); United States v. Lopez, 9 Cir., 581 F.2d 1338, 1340 (1979) (Federal Rules require unanimity: The only alternatives avai 1980Apodaca (10-2), supra; and Johnson (9-3), supra. The Federal circuit courts reviewing federal prosecutions have reversed convictions on a less-than-unanimous verdict, even where the defendant "waived" the unanimity requirement under the provisions of Rule 23(a) and (b), F.R.Cr.P., fn. 9, supra. Hibdon v. United States, 6 Cir., 204 F.2d 834, 838 (1953) (Unanimity is a procedural requirement but is also inextricably interwoven with the proof-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard); United States v. Lopez, 9 Cir., 581 F.2d 1338, 1340 (1979) (Federal Rules require unanimity: The only alternatives avai | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Ofelia Garcia Lopezgreen2 sentences1980Apodaca (10-2), supra; and Johnson (9-3), supra. The Federal circuit courts reviewing federal prosecutions have reversed convictions on a less-than-unanimous verdict, even where the defendant “waived” the unanimity requirement under the provisions of Rule 23(a) and (b), F.R.Cr.P., fn. 9, supra. Hibdon v. United States, 6 Cir., 204 F.2d 834, 838 (1953) (Unanimity is a procedural requirement but is also inextricably interwoven with the proof-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard); United States v. Lopez, 9 Cir., 581 F.2d 1338, 1340 (1979) (Federal Rules require unanimity: The only alternatives avai 1980Apodaca (10-2), supra; and Johnson (9-3), supra. The Federal circuit courts reviewing federal prosecutions have reversed convictions on a less-than-unanimous verdict, even where the defendant "waived" the unanimity requirement under the provisions of Rule 23(a) and (b), F.R.Cr.P., fn. 9, supra. Hibdon v. United States, 6 Cir., 204 F.2d 834, 838 (1953) (Unanimity is a procedural requirement but is also inextricably interwoven with the proof-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard); United States v. Lopez, 9 Cir., 581 F.2d 1338, 1340 (1979) (Federal Rules require unanimity: The only alternatives avai | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Wyoming. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
United States v. Ramirez
green
2 sentences2025In fact, the Ninth Circuit recognized “as a rule, special verdicts in criminal trials are not favored.” Id. (quoting United States v. Reed, 147 F.3d 1178, 1180 (9th Cir. 1998)). 2025In fact, the Ninth Circuit recognized “as a rule, special verdicts in criminal trials are not favored.” Id. (quoting United States v. Reed, 147 F.3d 1178 , 1180 (9th Cir. 1998)). | 2 | 2025–2025 |
Jason Henry Roberts v. The State of Wyoming
green
2 sentences2022Roberts v. State, 2022 WY 93, ¶ 19 , 513 P.3d 850 , 854–55 (Wyo. 2022) (citations and quotation marks omitted). [¶19] Mr. Walker contends the record clearly reflects that the jury was not properly instructed because the unequivocal law requires the instructions “leave no doubt as to the circumstances under which the crime can be found to have been committed.” Mueller v. State, 2001 WY 134, ¶ 9 , 36 P.3d 1151, 1155 (Wyo. 2001) (citations omitted); Leyva, ¶ 9, 106 P.3d at 876 ; Heywood, ¶¶ 17–33, 170 P.3d at 1232–36. 2022Roberts v. State, 2022 WY 93, ¶ 19 , 513 P.3d 850 , 854–55 (Wyo. 2022) (citations and quotation marks omitted). [¶19] Mr. Walker contends the record clearly reflects that the jury was not properly instructed because the unequivocal law requires the instructions “leave no doubt as to the circumstances under which the crime can be found to have been committed.” Mueller v. State, 2001 WY 134, ¶ 9 , 36 P.3d 1151, 1155 (Wyo. 2001) (citations omitted); Leyva, ¶ 9, 106 P.3d at 876 ; Heywood, ¶¶ 17–33, 170 P.3d at 1232–36. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Ramos v. Louisiana
green
2 sentences2022On April 20, 2020, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U.S. —, —, 140 S.Ct. 1390, 1397 , 206 L.Ed.2d 583 (2020), holding that “[t]here can be no question . . . that the Sixth Amendment’s unanimity requirement applies to state and federal criminal trials equally[,]” overruling Apodaca v. Oregon, 406 U.S. 404 , 92 S.Ct. 1628 , 32 L.Ed.2d 184 (1972). 13 conviction in violation of the Sixth Amendment guarantee to a unanimous jury verdict. 2022On April 20, 2020, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U.S. —, —, 140 S.Ct. 1390, 1397 , 206 L.Ed.2d 583 (2020), holding that “[t]here can be no question . . . that the Sixth Amendment’s unanimity requirement applies to state and federal criminal trials equally[,]” overruling Apodaca v. Oregon, 406 U.S. 404 , 92 S.Ct. 1628 , 32 L.Ed.2d 184 (1972). 13 conviction in violation of the Sixth Amendment guarantee to a unanimous jury verdict. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Apodaca v. Oregon
red
2 sentences2022On April 20, 2020, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U.S. —, —, 140 S.Ct. 1390, 1397 , 206 L.Ed.2d 583 (2020), holding that “[t]here can be no question . . . that the Sixth Amendment’s unanimity requirement applies to state and federal criminal trials equally[,]” overruling Apodaca v. Oregon, 406 U.S. 404 , 92 S.Ct. 1628 , 32 L.Ed.2d 184 (1972). 13 conviction in violation of the Sixth Amendment guarantee to a unanimous jury verdict. 2022On April 20, 2020, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U.S. —, —, 140 S.Ct. 1390, 1397 , 206 L.Ed.2d 583 (2020), holding that “[t]here can be no question . . . that the Sixth Amendment’s unanimity requirement applies to state and federal criminal trials equally[,]” overruling Apodaca v. Oregon, 406 U.S. 404 , 92 S.Ct. 1628 , 32 L.Ed.2d 184 (1972). 13 conviction in violation of the Sixth Amendment guarantee to a unanimous jury verdict. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Leyva v. State
green
1 sentence2022Roberts v. State, 2022 WY 93, ¶ 19 , 513 P.3d 850 , 854–55 (Wyo. 2022) (citations and quotation marks omitted). [¶19] Mr. Walker contends the record clearly reflects that the jury was not properly instructed because the unequivocal law requires the instructions “leave no doubt as to the circumstances under which the crime can be found to have been committed.” Mueller v. State, 2001 WY 134, ¶ 9 , 36 P.3d 1151, 1155 (Wyo. 2001) (citations omitted); Leyva, ¶ 9, 106 P.3d at 876 ; Heywood, ¶¶ 17–33, 170 P.3d at 1232–36. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
State v. Loehner
green
2 sentences1992When the State chooses not to elect, this jury instruction must be given to ensure the jury's understanding of the unanimity requirement." Loehner, 711 P.2d at 378 . [20] The trouble that the unitary first degree murder concept makes when questions of a lesser included offense are applied to felony murder is singularly demonstrated in the case of Thomas, 386 S.E.2d 555 . 1992When the State chooses not to elect, this jury instruction must be given to ensure the jury's understanding of the unanimity requirement." Loehner, 711 P.2d at 378 . . | 1 | 1992–1992 |
State v. Thomas
green
2 sentences1992When the State chooses not to elect, this jury instruction must be given to ensure the jury's understanding of the unanimity requirement." Loehner, 711 P.2d at 378 . [20] The trouble that the unitary first degree murder concept makes when questions of a lesser included offense are applied to felony murder is singularly demonstrated in the case of Thomas, 386 S.E.2d 555 . 1992The trouble that the unitary first degree murder concept makes when questions of a lesser included offense are applied to felony murder is singularly demonstrated in the case of Thomas, 386 S.E.2d 555 . | 1 | 1992–1992 |
State v. Allard
green
2 sentences1992App.3d 74 , 143 Ill.Dec. 761 , 554 N.E.2d 696 (1990), where separate verdicts were used in very recent cases; Huffman v. State, 543 N.E.2d 360 (Ind.1989), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 110 S.Ct. 3257 , 111 L.Ed.2d 767 (1990); Dechaine, 572 A.2d 130 ; and Allard, 557 A.2d 960 . 1992See also Holley, 942 F.2d 916 , where the conviction in a non-homicide case was reversed for failure to give a unanimity instruction; People v. Johnson, 197 Ill.App.3d 74 , 143 Ill.Dec. 761 , 554 N.E.2d 696 (1990), where separate verdicts were used in very recent cases; Huffman v. State, 543 N.E.2d 360 (Ind.1989), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 110 S.Ct. 3257 , 111 L.Ed.2d 767 (1990); Dechaine, 572 A.2d 130 ; and Allard, 557 A.2d 960 . | 1 | 1992–1992 |
State v. Parker
green
2 sentences1992Parker, 592 A.2d at 235 . 1992Parker, 592 A.2d at 235 . | 1 | 1992–1992 |
United States v. Robert Garcia, Jane Lee Garcia and Ralph Vallone, Jr., Robert Garcia and Jane Lee Garcia
green
1 sentence1992Waiver by neglect to request singularly valuable separate findings in jury verdict no matter how competent the legal representation proved equally and adversely efficacious in United States v. Garcia, 938 F.2d 12 (2nd Cir.1991), ce rt. denied, — U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 868 , 116 L.Ed.2d 774 (1992). | 1 | 1992–1992 |
State v. Dechaine
green
2 sentences1992App.3d 74 , 143 Ill.Dec. 761 , 554 N.E.2d 696 (1990), where separate verdicts were used in very recent cases; Huffman v. State, 543 N.E.2d 360 (Ind.1989), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 110 S.Ct. 3257 , 111 L.Ed.2d 767 (1990); Dechaine, 572 A.2d 130 ; and Allard, 557 A.2d 960 . 1992See also Holley, 942 F.2d 916 , where the conviction in a non-homicide case was reversed for failure to give a unanimity instruction; People v. Johnson, 197 Ill.App.3d 74 , 143 Ill.Dec. 761 , 554 N.E.2d 696 (1990), where separate verdicts were used in very recent cases; Huffman v. State, 543 N.E.2d 360 (Ind.1989), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 110 S.Ct. 3257 , 111 L.Ed.2d 767 (1990); Dechaine, 572 A.2d 130 ; and Allard, 557 A.2d 960 . | 1 | 1992–1992 |
People v. Johnson
neutral
2 sentences1992See also Holley, 942 F.2d 916 , where the conviction in a non-homicide case was reversed for failure to give a unanimity instruction; People v. Johnson, 197 Ill. 1992See also Holley, 942 F.2d 916 , where the conviction in a non-homicide case was reversed for failure to give a unanimity instruction; People v. Johnson, 197 Ill.App.3d 74 , 143 Ill.Dec. 761 , 554 N.E.2d 696 (1990), where separate verdicts were used in very recent cases; Huffman v. State, 543 N.E.2d 360 (Ind.1989), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 110 S.Ct. 3257 , 111 L.Ed.2d 767 (1990); Dechaine, 572 A.2d 130 ; and Allard, 557 A.2d 960 . | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Thompson v. Alabama
green
1 sentence1992Waiver by neglect to request singularly valuable separate findings in jury verdict no matter how competent the legal representation proved equally and adversely efficacious in United States v. Garcia, 938 F.2d 12 (2nd Cir.1991), ce rt. denied, — U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 868 , 116 L.Ed.2d 774 (1992). | 1 | 1992–1992 |
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.