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 Oklahoma opinions name it 2 courts 1994–2023 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Oklahoma 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 |
|---|---|---|
Maryland v. Buiegreen2 sentences2023See Buie, 494 U.S. at 335 - 356, 110 S.Ct. 1093 , 108 L.Ed. 276 ; Brewster, 157 Ohio App.3d 342 , 2004-Ohio-2722 , 811 N.E.2d 162, at ¶ 30 . 18 OHIO FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS {¶44} Further, admission of the evidence found during the search of the residence can be justified under the inevitable-discovery exception to the warrant requirement. 2023See Buie, 494 U.S. at 335 - 356, 110 S.Ct. 1093 , 108 L.Ed. 276 ; Brewster, 157 Ohio App.3d 342 , 2004-Ohio-2722 , 811 N.E.2d 162, at ¶ 30 . 18 OHIO FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS {¶44} Further, admission of the evidence found during the search of the residence can be justified under the inevitable-discovery exception to the warrant requirement. | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Luis C. Limaresgreen2 sentences2006See Limares, 269 F.3d at 799 . 2006See Limares, 269 F.3d at 799 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Oklahoma. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
STATE v. ALBA
green
2 sentences2018Alba , 2015 OK CR 2 , ¶ 5, 341 P.3d at 92 (citing U.S. Const. amend. 2018Alba , 2015 OK CR 2, ¶ 5 , 341 P.3d at 92 (citing U.S. Const. amend. | 2 | 2018–2018 |
STATE v. ALBA
green
2 sentences2018Alba , 2015 OK CR 2 , ¶ 5, 341 P.3d at 92 (citing U.S. Const. amend. 2018Alba , 2015 OK CR 2, ¶ 5 , 341 P.3d at 92 (citing U.S. Const. amend. | 2 | 2018–2018 |
State v. Foster
green
1 sentence2023Allen No. 1-14-54, 2015-Ohio-3401, ¶ 15 . | 1 | 2023–2023 |
State v. Brewster
green
2 sentences2023See Buie, 494 U.S. at 335 - 356, 110 S.Ct. 1093 , 108 L.Ed. 276 ; Brewster, 157 Ohio App.3d 342 , 2004-Ohio-2722 , 811 N.E.2d 162, at ¶ 30 . 18 OHIO FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS {¶44} Further, admission of the evidence found during the search of the residence can be justified under the inevitable-discovery exception to the warrant requirement. 2023See Buie, 494 U.S. at 335 - 356, 110 S.Ct. 1093 , 108 L.Ed. 276 ; Brewster, 157 Ohio App.3d 342 , 2004-Ohio-2722 , 811 N.E.2d 162, at ¶ 30 . 18 OHIO FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS {¶44} Further, admission of the evidence found during the search of the residence can be justified under the inevitable-discovery exception to the warrant requirement. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Nix v. Williams
green
2 sentences2002He also claims the trial court erroneously applied the inevitable discovery doctrine from Nix v. Williams, 467 U.S. 431 , 104 S.Ct. 2501 , 81 L.Ed.2d 377 (1984) in admitting a pair of brown coveralls. {19 In Matthews, 1998 OK CR 3, 111-16 , 953 P.2d at 341-48 , we found that Matthews was illegally arrested and that the admission of his incriminating post-arrest statement to a law enforcement agent necessitated reversal because the statement was the product of the illegal arrest that contributed to the verdict. 2002He also claims the trial court erroneously applied the inevitable discovery doctrine from Nix v. Williams, 467 U.S. 431 , 104 S.Ct. 2501 , 81 L.Ed.2d 377 (1984) in admitting a pair of brown coveralls. {19 In Matthews, 1998 OK CR 3, 111-16 , 953 P.2d at 341-48 , we found that Matthews was illegally arrested and that the admission of his incriminating post-arrest statement to a law enforcement agent necessitated reversal because the statement was the product of the illegal arrest that contributed to the verdict. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Matthews v. State
green
1 sentence2002He also claims the trial court erroneously applied the inevitable discovery doctrine from Nix v. Williams, 467 U.S. 431 , 104 S.Ct. 2501 , 81 L.Ed.2d 377 (1984) in admitting a pair of brown coveralls. {19 In Matthews, 1998 OK CR 3, 111-16 , 953 P.2d at 341-48 , we found that Matthews was illegally arrested and that the admission of his incriminating post-arrest statement to a law enforcement agent necessitated reversal because the statement was the product of the illegal arrest that contributed to the verdict. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Franks v. Delaware
green
2 sentences1994Appellant challenged the warrant prior to trial by filing a Motion to Suppress the marijuana in the car citing Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 , 98 S.Ct. 2674 , 57 L.Ed.2d 667 (1978) (search warrant supported only by false statement made knowingly or with reckless disregard for the truth is void, and evidence obtained thereby must be suppressed). 1994Appellant challenged the warrant prior to trial by filing a Motion to Suppress the marijuana in the car citing Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 , 98 S.Ct. 2674 , 57 L.Ed.2d 667 (1978) (search warrant supported only by false statement made knowingly or with reckless disregard for the truth is void, and evidence obtained thereby must be suppressed). | 1 | 1994–1994 |
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.