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 Iowa opinions name it 2 courts 1942–2024 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
Hyler v. Garnergreen1 sentence2024And to the extent the mandatory minimum is an issue, I think the facts and 6Miller also makes the vague claim that the district court “shifted the burden to convince the court [that a minimum term was not warranted] to Miller.” But other than the challenged statements we discuss in this section, he offers no further explanation of this claim. “[W]e will not speculate on the arguments [Miller] might have made and then search for legal authority and comb the record for facts to support such arguments.” Hyler v. Garner, 548 N.W.2d 864, 876 (Iowa 1996). 24 circumstances of this case demand it and | 1 | 1 |
Angela Rosario v. Stategreen1 sentence2022Prior cases in Iowa and around the nation demonstrate this result was not “dictated” by the Padilla precedent nor “apparent to all reasonable jurists.” See Chaidez, 568 U.S. at 347 ; Rosario v. State, 165 So. 3d 672, 673 (Fla. Dist. | 1 | 1 |
Meier v. SENECAUT IIIgreen1 sentence2020See Meier v. Senecaut, 641 N.W.2d 532, 537 (Iowa 2002). 4 On April 6, the supreme court entered an order containing the following provision: Those hearings that are set between April 6, 2020 and June 15, 2020 should either be continued until after June 15, 2020 or should ONLY be conducted by video or phone conferencing. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Iowa. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Scholl v. Allen, Judge
neutral
2 sentences1948No law of Delaware needs to he construed. [Italics supplied.] This court would be derelict in its duty to the public, and to all parties interested, if it declined jurisdiction and compelled the plaintiff to seek relief in the courts of Delaware, in violation of every consideration above set out.” This court then quoted from Scholl v. Allen, 237 Ky. 716, 726 , 36 S. W. 2d 353 , 358: “The vague principle that courts will not interfere with the internal affairs of a corporation whose foreignness is at best a metaphysical concept must fall before the practical necessities of the modern business w 1948No law of Delaware needs to he construed. [Italics supplied.] This court would be derelict in its duty to the public, and to all parties interested, if it declined jurisdiction and compelled the plaintiff to seek relief in the courts of Delaware, in violation of every consideration above set out.” This court then quoted from Scholl v. Allen, 237 Ky. 716, 726 , 36 S. W. 2d 353 , 358: “The vague principle that courts will not interfere with the internal affairs of a corporation whose foreignness is at best a metaphysical concept must fall before the practical necessities of the modern business w | 2 | 1942–1948 |
Chaidez v. United States
green
1 sentence2022Prior cases in Iowa and around the nation demonstrate this result was not “dictated” by the Padilla precedent nor “apparent to all reasonable jurists.” See Chaidez, 568 U.S. at 347 ; Rosario v. State, 165 So. 3d 672, 673 (Fla. Dist. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Roberto Morales Diaz v. State of Iowa
green
1 sentence2022In 2017, the Iowa Supreme Court made an arguably novel finding that the constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel extends beyond advising on deportation and beyond the vague warning of “adverse immigration consequences” to address all such consequences, including “removal, exclusion, bars to relief from removal, immigration detention, denial of citizenship, and adverse consequences to the client’s immediate family.” Morales Diaz, 896 N.W.2d at 732 . | 1 | 2022–2022 |
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.