5 Iowa opinions name it 2 courts 2010–2019 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Iowa 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Humegreen2 sentences2014See id. § 12, cmt. to 1982 amend.; State v. Hume, 512 So. 2d 185, 187 (Fla. 1987) (noting “the amendment to section 12 was intended, in part, to overrule our decision in [State v.] Sarmiento[, 397 So. 2d 643 (Fla. 1981)]”). 12 The majority wrongly concludes the State failed to preserve error on the consent issue because the State used the term “waiver” in arguing the consent-to- search provision in Short’s probation agreement should be enforced. 2014See id. § 12, cmt. to 1982 amend.; State v. Hume, 512 So. 2d 185, 187 (Fla. 1987) (noting “the amendment to section 12 was intended, in part, to overrule our decision in [State v.] Sarmiento[, 397 So. 2d 643 (Fla. 19811]”). 12 The majority wrongly concludes the State failed to preserve error on the consent issue because the State used the term “waiver” in arguing the consent-to- search provision in Short’s probation agreement should be enforced. | 2 | 2 |
Meier v. SENECAUT IIIgreen1 sentence2019See Meier , 641 N.W.2d at 541 (holding defendant waived appellate review of issue not reached by the court when defendant failed to renew his request for a ruling on that issue). | 1 | 1 |
DeVoss v. Stategreen1 sentence2010DeVoss v. State, 648 N.W.2d 56, 60-61 (Iowa 2002). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Iowa. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Sarmiento
green
2 sentences2014See id. § 12, cmt. to 1982 amend.; State v. Hume, 512 So. 2d 185, 187 (Fla. 1987) (noting “the amendment to section 12 was intended, in part, to overrule our decision in [State v.] Sarmiento[, 397 So. 2d 643 (Fla. 1981)]”). 12 The majority wrongly concludes the State failed to preserve error on the consent issue because the State used the term “waiver” in arguing the consent-to- search provision in Short’s probation agreement should be enforced. 2014See id. § 12, cmt. to 1982 amend.; State v. Hume, 512 So. 2d 185, 187 (Fla. 1987) (noting “the amendment to section 12 was intended, in part, to overrule our decision in [State v.] Sarmiento[, 397 So. 2d 643 (Fla. 19811]”). 12 The majority wrongly concludes the State failed to preserve error on the consent issue because the State used the term “waiver” in arguing the consent-to- search provision in Short’s probation agreement should be enforced. | 2 | 2014–2014 |
Dennis L. Smith v. Iowa State University of Science and Technology and State of Iowa
green
1 sentence2016Id. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
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.