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 2010–2016 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 |
|---|---|---|
New Jersey v. T. L. O.green2 sentences2015The doctrine derived its name from the concurring opinion of Justice Blackmun, who stated: “Only in those exceptional circumstances in which special needs, beyond the normal need for law enforcement, make the warrant and probable-cause requirement impracticable, is a court entitled to substitute its balancing of interests for that of the Framers.” Id. at 351 , 105 S.Ct. at 748 , 83 L.Ed.2d at 741 (Blackmun, J., concurring in judgment). 2015The doctrine derived its name from the concurring opinion of Justice Blackmun, who stated: “Only in those exceptional circumstances in which special needs, beyond the normal need for law enforcement, make the warrant and probable-cause requirement impracticable, is a court entitled to substitute its balancing of interests for that of the Framers.” Id. at 351 , 105 S.Ct. at 748 , 83 L.Ed.2d at 741 (Blackmun, J., concurring in judgment). | 3 | 3 |
Griffin v. Wisconsingreen2 sentences2013The State asserts the search of Kern’s home was justified because Iowa’s maintenance of a parole system presents “exceptional circumstances in which special needs, beyond the normal need for law enforcement, make the warrant and probable-cause requirement impracticable.” New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325, 351 , 105 S.Ct. 733, 748 , 83 L.Ed.2d 720, 741 (1985) (Blackmun, J., concurring); cf. Griffin v. Wisconsin, 483 U.S. 868, 875-76 , 107 S.Ct. 3164, 3169 , 97 L.Ed.2d 709, 718-19 (1987) (holding that Wisconsin’s maintenance of a probation system constitutes a special need, justifying departure 2013The State asserts the search of Kern’s home was justified because Iowa’s maintenance of a parole system presents “exceptional circumstances in which special needs, beyond the normal need for law enforcement, make the warrant and probable-cause requirement impracticable.” New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325, 351 , 105 S.Ct. 733, 748 , 83 L.Ed.2d 720, 741 (1985) (Blackmun, J., concurring); cf. Griffin v. Wisconsin, 483 U.S. 868, 875-76 , 107 S.Ct. 3164, 3169 , 97 L.Ed.2d 709, 718-19 (1987) (holding that Wisconsin’s maintenance of a probation system constitutes a special need, justifying departure | 2 | 4 |
Camara v. Municipal Court of City and County of San Franciscogreen2 sentences2016Court, 387 U.S. 523, 535 (1967) (Blackmun, J., concurring) (“Only in those exceptional circumstances in which special needs, beyond the normal need for law enforcement, make the warrant and probable-cause requirement impracticable, is a court entitled to substitute its balancing of interests for that of the Framers.”). 2013In contrast, warrants showing authority to enter a home remained indispensable because the government interest could still be served within the confines _____________________ Iowa Constitution and did not examine why any particular search would implicate “ ‘special needs, beyond the normal need for law enforcement, mak[ing] the warrant and probable-cause requirement impracticable.’ ” See id. at 145–47 & n.2 (quoting Bd. of Educ. of Indep. | 1 | 2 |
Hoffa v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2010These cases, however, were no doubt influenced by prevailing jurisprudence of the United States Supreme Court, which has now generally tended to move away from the warrant and probable cause requirement in many contexts. __________________________ U.S. 293, 301, 87 S. Ct. 408, 413 , 17 L. 2010These cases, however, were no doubt influenced by prevailing jurisprudence of the United States Supreme Court, which has now generally tended to move away from the warrant and probable cause requirement in many contexts. __________________________ U.S. 293, 301, 87 S. Ct. 408, 413 , 17 L. | 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. Breuer
green
1 sentence2013Jones featured no independent analysis of the Iowa Constitution and did not examine why any particular search would implicate “ 'special needs, beyond the normal need for law enforcement, mak[ing] the warrant and probable-cause requirement impracticable.' ” See id. at 146 n. 2 (quoting Bd. of Bduc. of Indep. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
State v. Cline
green
2 sentences2010In the search and seizure area, we decided one important case on independent state grounds in Cline, 617 N.W.2d at 278 . 2010Ed. 2d 374, 381 (1966) (“A hotel room can clearly be the object of Fourth Amendment protection as much as a home . . . .”). 46 In the search and seizure area, we decided one important case on independent state grounds in Cline, 617 N.W.2d at 278 . | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.