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.
6 Kansas opinions name it 2 courts 1966–2000 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Kansas 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 |
|---|---|---|
| No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kansas. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Roberts
green
2 sentences1980In State v. Roberts, 210 Kan. 786 , 504 P.2d 242 (1972), cert. denied 414 U.S. 832 (1973), and State v. Edwards, 197 Kan. 146 , 415 P.2d 231 (1966), defendants who were passengers in automobiles driven by the owner were held not to have a sufficient possessory interest in the automobile to warrant standing to raise the issue of unreasonable search and seizure of evidence. “fO]ne who is neither an owner nor in possession of an automobile lacks standing to invoke the constitutional guarantee of immunity from unreasonable search and seizure. [Citations omitted.]” 197 Kan. at 148 . 1980In State v. Roberts, 210 Kan. 786 , 504 P.2d 242 (1972), cert. denied 414 U.S. 832 (1973), and State v. Edwards, 197 Kan. 146 , 415 P.2d 231 (1966), defendants who were passengers in automobiles driven by the owner were held not to have a sufficient possessory interest in the automobile to warrant standing to raise the issue of unreasonable search and seizure of evidence. “fO]ne who is neither an owner nor in possession of an automobile lacks standing to invoke the constitutional guarantee of immunity from unreasonable search and seizure. [Citations omitted.]” 197 Kan. at 148 . | 5 | 1975–2000 |
State v. Edwards
neutral
2 sentences1980In State v. Roberts, 210 Kan. 786 , 504 P.2d 242 (1972), cert. denied 414 U.S. 832 (1973), and State v. Edwards, 197 Kan. 146 , 415 P.2d 231 (1966), defendants who were passengers in automobiles driven by the owner were held not to have a sufficient possessory interest in the automobile to warrant standing to raise the issue of unreasonable search and seizure of evidence. “fO]ne who is neither an owner nor in possession of an automobile lacks standing to invoke the constitutional guarantee of immunity from unreasonable search and seizure. [Citations omitted.]” 197 Kan. at 148 . 1980In State v. Roberts, 210 Kan. 786 , 504 P.2d 242 (1972), cert. denied 414 U.S. 832 (1973), and State v. Edwards, 197 Kan. 146 , 415 P.2d 231 (1966), defendants who were passengers in automobiles driven by the owner were held not to have a sufficient possessory interest in the automobile to warrant standing to raise the issue of unreasonable search and seizure of evidence. “fO]ne who is neither an owner nor in possession of an automobile lacks standing to invoke the constitutional guarantee of immunity from unreasonable search and seizure. [Citations omitted.]” 197 Kan. at 148 . | 4 | 1975–1985 |
Roberts v. Kansas
neutral
2 sentences2000State v. Epperson, 237 Kan. 707, 716 , 703 P.2d 761 (1985); State v. Roberts, 210 Kan. 786, 789 , 504 P.2d 242 (1972), cert. denied 414 U.S. 832 (1973). 1980In State v. Roberts, 210 Kan. 786 , 504 P.2d 242 (1972), cert. denied 414 U.S. 832 (1973), and State v. Edwards, 197 Kan. 146 , 415 P.2d 231 (1966), defendants who were passengers in automobiles driven by the owner were held not to have a sufficient possessory interest in the automobile to warrant standing to raise the issue of unreasonable search and seizure of evidence. “fO]ne who is neither an owner nor in possession of an automobile lacks standing to invoke the constitutional guarantee of immunity from unreasonable search and seizure. [Citations omitted.]” 197 Kan. at 148 . | 2 | 1980–2000 |
Head and Cummings v. State
green
2 sentences1985(State v. Sumner, 210 Kan. 802 , 504 P.2d 239 ; Jones v. United States, *717 362 U.S. 257 , 4 L.Ed.2d 697 , 80 S.Ct. 725 ; Brown v. United States, 411 U.S. 223 , 36 L.Ed.2d 208 , 93 S.Ct. 1565 ; Head and Cummings v. State, 246 Miss. 203 , 136 So. 2d 619 .) “On numerous occasions we have applied this principle to the search of an automobile and held that one who is neither an owner nor in possession of an automobile lacks standing to invoke the constitutional guarantee of immunity from unreasonable search and seizure. 1985(State v. Sumner, 210 Kan. 802 , 504 P.2d 239 ; Jones v. United States, *717 362 U.S. 257 , 4 L.Ed.2d 697 , 80 S.Ct. 725 ; Brown v. United States, 411 U.S. 223 , 36 L.Ed.2d 208 , 93 S.Ct. 1565 ; Head and Cummings v. State, 246 Miss. 203 , 136 So. 2d 619 .) “On numerous occasions we have applied this principle to the search of an automobile and held that one who is neither an owner nor in possession of an automobile lacks standing to invoke the constitutional guarantee of immunity from unreasonable search and seizure. | 2 | 1975–1985 |
State v. Boster
yellow
2 sentences1985In State v. Boster, 217 Kan. 618 , 539 P.2d 294 , this court stated: “ ‘On numerous occasions we have applied this principle to the search of an automobile and held that one who is neither an owner nor in possession of an automobile lacks standing to invoke the constitutional guarantee of immunity from unreasonable search and seizure. 1985In State v. Boster, 217 Kan. 618 , 539 P.2d 294 , this court stated: “ ‘On numerous occasions we have applied this principle to the search of an automobile and held that one who is neither an owner nor in possession of an automobile lacks standing to invoke the constitutional guarantee of immunity from unreasonable search and seizure. | 2 | 1977–1985 |
State v. Sumner
green
2 sentences1985(State v. Sumner, 210 Kan. 802 , 504 P.2d 239 ; Jones v. United States, *717 362 U.S. 257 , 4 L.Ed.2d 697 , 80 S.Ct. 725 ; Brown v. United States, 411 U.S. 223 , 36 L.Ed.2d 208 , 93 S.Ct. 1565 ; Head and Cummings v. State, 246 Miss. 203 , 136 So. 2d 619 .) “On numerous occasions we have applied this principle to the search of an automobile and held that one who is neither an owner nor in possession of an automobile lacks standing to invoke the constitutional guarantee of immunity from unreasonable search and seizure. 1985(State v. Sumner, 210 Kan. 802 , 504 P.2d 239 ; Jones v. United States, *717 362 U.S. 257 , 4 L.Ed.2d 697 , 80 S.Ct. 725 ; Brown v. United States, 411 U.S. 223 , 36 L.Ed.2d 208 , 93 S.Ct. 1565 ; Head and Cummings v. State, 246 Miss. 203 , 136 So. 2d 619 .) “On numerous occasions we have applied this principle to the search of an automobile and held that one who is neither an owner nor in possession of an automobile lacks standing to invoke the constitutional guarantee of immunity from unreasonable search and seizure. | 2 | 1975–1985 |
State v. Heath
green
2 sentences1985(State v. Edwards, 197 Kan. 146 , 415 P.2d 231 ; State v. Roberts, 210 Kan. 786 , 504 P.2d 242 .) . . . “ ‘Similarly, we denied a motion to suppress for lack of standing in Roberts , where the defendant was only a passenger in the car that was searched and he claimed no ownership or interest in it.’ (p. 621.)” 222 Kan. at 51-52 . 1980In State v. Heath, 222 Kan. 50 , 563 P.2d 418 (1977), the driver of the car searched was in possession of the automobile with the consent of its owner. | 2 | 1980–1985 |
Jones v. United States
red
2 sentences1985(State v. Sumner, 210 Kan. 802 , 504 P.2d 239 ; Jones v. United States, *717 362 U.S. 257 , 4 L.Ed.2d 697 , 80 S.Ct. 725 ; Brown v. United States, 411 U.S. 223 , 36 L.Ed.2d 208 , 93 S.Ct. 1565 ; Head and Cummings v. State, 246 Miss. 203 , 136 So. 2d 619 .) “On numerous occasions we have applied this principle to the search of an automobile and held that one who is neither an owner nor in possession of an automobile lacks standing to invoke the constitutional guarantee of immunity from unreasonable search and seizure. 1985(State v. Sumner, 210 Kan. 802 , 504 P.2d 239 ; Jones v. United States, *717 362 U.S. 257 , 4 L.Ed.2d 697 , 80 S.Ct. 725 ; Brown v. United States, 411 U.S. 223 , 36 L.Ed.2d 208 , 93 S.Ct. 1565 ; Head and Cummings v. State, 246 Miss. 203 , 136 So. 2d 619 .) “On numerous occasions we have applied this principle to the search of an automobile and held that one who is neither an owner nor in possession of an automobile lacks standing to invoke the constitutional guarantee of immunity from unreasonable search and seizure. | 2 | 1975–1985 |
Brown v. United States
green
2 sentences1985(State v. Sumner, 210 Kan. 802 , 504 P.2d 239 ; Jones v. United States, *717 362 U.S. 257 , 4 L.Ed.2d 697 , 80 S.Ct. 725 ; Brown v. United States, 411 U.S. 223 , 36 L.Ed.2d 208 , 93 S.Ct. 1565 ; Head and Cummings v. State, 246 Miss. 203 , 136 So. 2d 619 .) “On numerous occasions we have applied this principle to the search of an automobile and held that one who is neither an owner nor in possession of an automobile lacks standing to invoke the constitutional guarantee of immunity from unreasonable search and seizure. 1985(State v. Sumner, 210 Kan. 802 , 504 P.2d 239 ; Jones v. United States, *717 362 U.S. 257 , 4 L.Ed.2d 697 , 80 S.Ct. 725 ; Brown v. United States, 411 U.S. 223 , 36 L.Ed.2d 208 , 93 S.Ct. 1565 ; Head and Cummings v. State, 246 Miss. 203 , 136 So. 2d 619 .) “On numerous occasions we have applied this principle to the search of an automobile and held that one who is neither an owner nor in possession of an automobile lacks standing to invoke the constitutional guarantee of immunity from unreasonable search and seizure. | 2 | 1975–1985 |
State v. Epperson
green
2 sentences2000State v. Epperson, 237 Kan. 707, 716 , 703 P.2d 761 (1985); State v. Roberts, 210 Kan. 786, 789 , 504 P.2d 242 (1972), cert. denied 414 U.S. 832 (1973). 2000State v. Epperson, 237 Kan. 707, 716 , 703 P.2d 761 (1985); State v. Roberts, 210 Kan. 786, 789 , 504 P.2d 242 (1972), cert. denied 414 U.S. 832 (1973). | 1 | 2000–2000 |
McCain v. State
green
1 sentence1966(McCain v. State, Fla. App. 1963, 151 So. 2d 841 ; McDoulett v. State, Okla. | 1 | 1966–1966 |
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.