5 Idaho opinions name it 2 courts 1982–2014 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Idaho 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. Crawfordgreen2 sentences2012Id. at 479-80 , 491 P.2d at 860-61 ; see also Crawford, 99 Idaho at 98 , 577 P.2d at 1146 (holding the use of restraints after an ex parte hearing with the State violated the defendant’s due process rights to a fair trial). 2012Id. at 479-80 , 491 P.2d at 860-61 ; see also Crawford, 99 Idaho at 98 , 577 P.2d at 1146 (holding the use of restraints after an ex parte hearing with the State violated the defendant’s due process rights to a fair trial). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Idaho. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Moen
green
2 sentences2014Id. at 479-80 , 491 P.2d at 860-61 ; see also Crawford, 99 Idaho at 98, 577 P.2d at 1146 (holding the use of restraints after an ex parte hearing with the State violated the defendant’s due process rights to a fair trial). 2014Id. at 479-80 , 491 P.2d at 860-61 ; see also Crawford, 99 Idaho at 98, 577 P.2d at 1146 (holding the use of restraints after an ex parte hearing with the State violated the defendant’s due process rights to a fair trial). | 2 | 2012–2014 |
State v. Randolph
green
2 sentences1991However, in State v. Randolph, 102 Idaho 153 , 627 P.2d 782 (1981), this Court held that an ex parte instruction that was a correct statement of the law was harmless error. 1991However, in State v. Randolph, 102 Idaho 153 , 627 P.2d 782 (1981), this Court held that an ex parte instruction that was a correct statement of the law was harmless error. | 2 | 1991–2005 |
cluster 396567
green
1 sentence1982It is evident, therefore, that the policies enunciated by the United States Supreme Court countenancing application of absolute witness immunity proscribe its application in this instance. *900 Each of the cases cited by the Court in support of the majority rule favoring absolute immunity for witnesses, Charles v. Wade, 665 F.2d 661 (5th Cir.1982); Briscoe v. LaHue, 663 F.2d 713 (7th Cir.1981), cert. granted, ___ U.S. ___, 102 S.Ct. 1708 , 72 L.Ed.2d 132 (1982); Myers v. Bull, 599 F.2d 863 (8th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 901 , 100 S.Ct. 213 , 62 L.Ed.2d 138 (1979); Burke v. Miller, 580 | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Earl Charles v. F. W. Wade, Leo B. Ryan and City of Savannah, Georgia
green
1 sentence1982It is evident, therefore, that the policies enunciated by the United States Supreme Court countenancing application of absolute witness immunity proscribe its application in this instance. *900 Each of the cases cited by the Court in support of the majority rule favoring absolute immunity for witnesses, Charles v. Wade, 665 F.2d 661 (5th Cir.1982); Briscoe v. LaHue, 663 F.2d 713 (7th Cir.1981), cert. granted, ___ U.S. ___, 102 S.Ct. 1708 , 72 L.Ed.2d 132 (1982); Myers v. Bull, 599 F.2d 863 (8th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 901 , 100 S.Ct. 213 , 62 L.Ed.2d 138 (1979); Burke v. Miller, 580 | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Brawer v. Horowitz
green
1 sentence1982It is evident, therefore, that the policies enunciated by the United States Supreme Court countenancing application of absolute witness immunity proscribe its application in this instance. *900 Each of the cases cited by the Court in support of the majority rule favoring absolute immunity for witnesses, Charles v. Wade, 665 F.2d 661 (5th Cir.1982); Briscoe v. LaHue, 663 F.2d 713 (7th Cir.1981), cert. granted, ___ U.S. ___, 102 S.Ct. 1708 , 72 L.Ed.2d 132 (1982); Myers v. Bull, 599 F.2d 863 (8th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 901 , 100 S.Ct. 213 , 62 L.Ed.2d 138 (1979); Burke v. Miller, 580 | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Howard Smith Bennett v. Albert Passic, Sheriff, Etc.
green
1 sentence1982It is evident, therefore, that the policies enunciated by the United States Supreme Court countenancing application of absolute witness immunity proscribe its application in this instance. *900 Each of the cases cited by the Court in support of the majority rule favoring absolute immunity for witnesses, Charles v. Wade, 665 F.2d 661 (5th Cir.1982); Briscoe v. LaHue, 663 F.2d 713 (7th Cir.1981), cert. granted, ___ U.S. ___, 102 S.Ct. 1708 , 72 L.Ed.2d 132 (1982); Myers v. Bull, 599 F.2d 863 (8th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 901 , 100 S.Ct. 213 , 62 L.Ed.2d 138 (1979); Burke v. Miller, 580 | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Herman K. Burke v. Jerry Miller, M.D.
green
1 sentence1982It is evident, therefore, that the policies enunciated by the United States Supreme Court countenancing application of absolute witness immunity proscribe its application in this instance. *900 Each of the cases cited by the Court in support of the majority rule favoring absolute immunity for witnesses, Charles v. Wade, 665 F.2d 661 (5th Cir.1982); Briscoe v. LaHue, 663 F.2d 713 (7th Cir.1981), cert. granted, ___ U.S. ___, 102 S.Ct. 1708 , 72 L.Ed.2d 132 (1982); Myers v. Bull, 599 F.2d 863 (8th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 901 , 100 S.Ct. 213 , 62 L.Ed.2d 138 (1979); Burke v. Miller, 580 | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Philip D. Myers v. Clyde Harold Bull
green
1 sentence1982It is evident, therefore, that the policies enunciated by the United States Supreme Court countenancing application of absolute witness immunity proscribe its application in this instance. *900 Each of the cases cited by the Court in support of the majority rule favoring absolute immunity for witnesses, Charles v. Wade, 665 F.2d 661 (5th Cir.1982); Briscoe v. LaHue, 663 F.2d 713 (7th Cir.1981), cert. granted, ___ U.S. ___, 102 S.Ct. 1708 , 72 L.Ed.2d 132 (1982); Myers v. Bull, 599 F.2d 863 (8th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 901 , 100 S.Ct. 213 , 62 L.Ed.2d 138 (1979); Burke v. Miller, 580 | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Woods v. Safeway Stores, Inc.
green
1 sentence1982It is evident, therefore, that the policies enunciated by the United States Supreme Court countenancing application of absolute witness immunity proscribe its application in this instance. *900 Each of the cases cited by the Court in support of the majority rule favoring absolute immunity for witnesses, Charles v. Wade, 665 F.2d 661 (5th Cir.1982); Briscoe v. LaHue, 663 F.2d 713 (7th Cir.1981), cert. granted, ___ U.S. ___, 102 S.Ct. 1708 , 72 L.Ed.2d 132 (1982); Myers v. Bull, 599 F.2d 863 (8th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 901 , 100 S.Ct. 213 , 62 L.Ed.2d 138 (1979); Burke v. Miller, 580 | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Burke v. Miller
neutral
1 sentence1982It is evident, therefore, that the policies enunciated by the United States Supreme Court countenancing application of absolute witness immunity proscribe its application in this instance. *900 Each of the cases cited by the Court in support of the majority rule favoring absolute immunity for witnesses, Charles v. Wade, 665 F.2d 661 (5th Cir.1982); Briscoe v. LaHue, 663 F.2d 713 (7th Cir.1981), cert. granted, ___ U.S. ___, 102 S.Ct. 1708 , 72 L.Ed.2d 132 (1982); Myers v. Bull, 599 F.2d 863 (8th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 901 , 100 S.Ct. 213 , 62 L.Ed.2d 138 (1979); Burke v. Miller, 580 | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Hargrove v. City of Garland
green
1 sentence1982It is evident, therefore, that the policies enunciated by the United States Supreme Court countenancing application of absolute witness immunity proscribe its application in this instance. *900 Each of the cases cited by the Court in support of the majority rule favoring absolute immunity for witnesses, Charles v. Wade, 665 F.2d 661 (5th Cir.1982); Briscoe v. LaHue, 663 F.2d 713 (7th Cir.1981), cert. granted, ___ U.S. ___, 102 S.Ct. 1708 , 72 L.Ed.2d 132 (1982); Myers v. Bull, 599 F.2d 863 (8th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 901 , 100 S.Ct. 213 , 62 L.Ed.2d 138 (1979); Burke v. Miller, 580 | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Myers v. Bull
green
1 sentence1982It is evident, therefore, that the policies enunciated by the United States Supreme Court countenancing application of absolute witness immunity proscribe its application in this instance. *900 Each of the cases cited by the Court in support of the majority rule favoring absolute immunity for witnesses, Charles v. Wade, 665 F.2d 661 (5th Cir.1982); Briscoe v. LaHue, 663 F.2d 713 (7th Cir.1981), cert. granted, ___ U.S. ___, 102 S.Ct. 1708 , 72 L.Ed.2d 132 (1982); Myers v. Bull, 599 F.2d 863 (8th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 901 , 100 S.Ct. 213 , 62 L.Ed.2d 138 (1979); Burke v. Miller, 580 | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Greer v. United States
green
1 sentence1982It is evident, therefore, that the policies enunciated by the United States Supreme Court countenancing application of absolute witness immunity proscribe its application in this instance. *900 Each of the cases cited by the Court in support of the majority rule favoring absolute immunity for witnesses, Charles v. Wade, 665 F.2d 661 (5th Cir.1982); Briscoe v. LaHue, 663 F.2d 713 (7th Cir.1981), cert. granted, ___ U.S. ___, 102 S.Ct. 1708 , 72 L.Ed.2d 132 (1982); Myers v. Bull, 599 F.2d 863 (8th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 901 , 100 S.Ct. 213 , 62 L.Ed.2d 138 (1979); Burke v. Miller, 580 | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Dickerson v. New Banner Institute, Inc.
green
1 sentence1982It is evident, therefore, that the policies enunciated by the United States Supreme Court countenancing application of absolute witness immunity proscribe its application in this instance. *900 Each of the cases cited by the Court in support of the majority rule favoring absolute immunity for witnesses, Charles v. Wade, 665 F.2d 661 (5th Cir.1982); Briscoe v. LaHue, 663 F.2d 713 (7th Cir.1981), cert. granted, ___ U.S. ___, 102 S.Ct. 1708 , 72 L.Ed.2d 132 (1982); Myers v. Bull, 599 F.2d 863 (8th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 901 , 100 S.Ct. 213 , 62 L.Ed.2d 138 (1979); Burke v. Miller, 580 | 1 | 1982–1982 |
United States v. Eight Thousand Eight Hundred & Fifty Dollars ($8,850) in United States Currency
green
1 sentence1982It is evident, therefore, that the policies enunciated by the United States Supreme Court countenancing application of absolute witness immunity proscribe its application in this instance. *900 Each of the cases cited by the Court in support of the majority rule favoring absolute immunity for witnesses, Charles v. Wade, 665 F.2d 661 (5th Cir.1982); Briscoe v. LaHue, 663 F.2d 713 (7th Cir.1981), cert. granted, ___ U.S. ___, 102 S.Ct. 1708 , 72 L.Ed.2d 132 (1982); Myers v. Bull, 599 F.2d 863 (8th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 901 , 100 S.Ct. 213 , 62 L.Ed.2d 138 (1979); Burke v. Miller, 580 | 1 | 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.