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.
5 Alabama opinions name it 1 courts 1977–1982 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Alabama 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 |
|---|---|---|
Hatton v. Stategreen2 sentences1982Finally a tip that will not meet any of these standards may still be used in conjunction with a number of other factors of `further support' to show probable cause." (Citations omitted.) Hatton v. State , 359 So.2d 822 , 826 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977), writ quashed , 359 So.2d 832 (Ala. 1978); Spencer v. Town of Gordo , 389 So.2d 182 (Ala.Cr.App. 1980). 1982Finally a tip that will not meet any of these standards may still be used in conjunction with a number of other factors of ‘further support’ to show probable cause.” (Citations omitted.) Hatton v. State, 359 So.2d 822, 826 (Ala.Cr. | 1 | 4 |
United States v. Oscar Squella-Avendanogreen2 sentences1978Hatton, supra. In United States v. Squella-Avendano , 447 F.2d 575 (5th Cir. 1971), at 580, it was stated: ". . . 1977In United States v. Squella-Avendano, 447 F.2d 575, 580 (C.A. 5 1971), the United States Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals commented on the composite test of Aguilar, supra and Spinelli, supra, which is applied where the tip fails to meet the requirements of Aguilar . | 1 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Lomax v. State
green
2 sentences1982Finally a tip that will not meet any of these standards may still be used in conjunction with a number of other factors of `further support' to show probable cause." (Citations omitted.) Hatton v. State , 359 So.2d 822 , 826 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977), writ quashed , 359 So.2d 832 (Ala. 1978); Spencer v. Town of Gordo , 389 So.2d 182 (Ala.Cr.App. 1980). 1982App.1977), writ quashed, 359 So.2d 832 (Ala. 1978); Spencer v. Town of Gordo, 389 So.2d 182 (Ala.Cr.App.1980). | 2 | 1982–1982 |
Spencer v. Town of Gordo
green
2 sentences1982Finally a tip that will not meet any of these standards may still be used in conjunction with a number of other factors of `further support' to show probable cause." (Citations omitted.) Hatton v. State , 359 So.2d 822 , 826 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977), writ quashed , 359 So.2d 832 (Ala. 1978); Spencer v. Town of Gordo , 389 So.2d 182 (Ala.Cr.App. 1980). 1982App.1977), writ quashed, 359 So.2d 832 (Ala. 1978); Spencer v. Town of Gordo, 389 So.2d 182 (Ala.Cr.App.1980). | 2 | 1982–1982 |
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.