Gates standard (Tennessee) · Go Syfert
← Tennessee issues

Gates standard in Tennessee

6 Tennessee opinions name it 2 courts 1989–2025 1 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Tennessee 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.

Followed or applied (1)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Jacksongreen
wash · 1984 · cited in 1 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 1989–1989
2 sentences

1989The Supreme Court of Washington also rejected application of the Gates standard under that State’s constitution, characterizing it as “nebulous.” State v. Jackson, 102 Wash.2d 432, 435 , 688 P.2d 136, 139 (1984).

1989The Supreme Court of Washington also rejected application of the Gates standard under that State’s constitution, characterizing it as “nebulous.” State v. Jackson, 102 Wash.2d 432, 435 , 688 P.2d 136, 139 (1984).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (5)

CaseCitedYears
Illinois v. Gates green
scotus · 1983
2 sentences

2025Id. at 308 .

2025Id. at 308 .

22020–2025
State v. Jacumin green
tenn · 1989
2 sentences

2017The Jaeumin Court conceded that “the task of the issuing magistrates and the duty of the reviewing eourt[s] ... are the same under either the Gates standard or the Aguilar ITlSpinelli standard.” Id. at 435 n.2.

2017The Jaeumin Court conceded that “the task of the issuing magistrates and the duty of the reviewing eourt[s] ... are the same under either the Gates standard or the Aguilar ITlSpinelli standard.” Id. at 435 n.2.

22014–2017
Meadows v. State green
tenn · 1993
2 sentences

2014Because the Court of Criminal Appeals had previously applied the Illinois v. Gates standard in nine cases, our decision in Meadows v. State to abandon the Gates standard was clearly a result “not dictated by precedent.” Meadows v. State, 849 S.W.2d at 751-53 .

2014Because the Court of Criminal Appeals had previously applied the Illinois v. Gates standard in nine cases, our decision in Meadows v. State to abandon the Gates standard was clearly a result “not dictated by precedent.” Meadows v. State, 849 S.W.2d at 751-53 .

22014–2014
State v. Jones green
alaska · 1985
2 sentences

1989Further, see State v. Jones, 706 P.2d 317 (Alaska 1985) and People v. Johnson, 66 N.Y.2d 398 , 497 N.Y.S.2d 618 , 488 N.E.2d 439 (1985) for decisions of similar import.

1989Further, see State v. Jones, 706 P.2d 317 (Alaska 1985) and People v. Johnson, 66 N.Y.2d 398 , 497 N.Y.S.2d 618 , 488 N.E.2d 439 (1985) for decisions of similar import.

11989–1989
People v. Johnson green
ny · 1985
2 sentences

1989Further, see State v. Jones, 706 P.2d 317 (Alaska 1985) and People v. Johnson, 66 N.Y.2d 398 , 497 N.Y.S.2d 618 , 488 N.E.2d 439 (1985) for decisions of similar import.

1989Further, see State v. Jones, 706 P.2d 317 (Alaska 1985) and People v. Johnson, 66 N.Y.2d 398 , 497 N.Y.S.2d 618 , 488 N.E.2d 439 (1985) for decisions of similar import.

11989–1989

Where else courts name it

TX 31 (1984–2017) IL 15 (1984–2026) PA 13 (1998–2026) NY 10 (1985–1989) CA 9 (1902–2021) ID 8 (1967–1992) GA 8 (1978–2023) FL 8 (1986–2006) UT 8 (1985–1993) MD 8 (1984–2007) MS 7 (1985–2026) CO 7 (1986–1998) CT 7 (1985–2010) TN 6 (1989–2025) KY 6 (2014–2026) IA 6 (1976–1992) WY 5 (2010–2026) VT 5 (1987–2009) MT 5 (1983–2001) MN 5 (1984–2002) OK 4 (1987–1992) MA 4 (1984–2001) KS 3 (2003–2007) AL 3 (1985–2007) AZ 2 (1991–2015) NH 2 (1986–1988) OH 2 (1988–2008) IN 2 (2010–2018) MI 2 (1984–1993) RI 2 (2001–2021) LA 2 (1984–1984) NJ 2 (1986–1987) WV 2 (1986–1987) SD 2 (2000–2004) ME 2 (1993–1996) HI 2 (2011–2011)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check