Topic: a trial court has 'broad discretion' in determining whether… · Go Syfert
← All topics

Topic #10762

8 canonical passages across 8 cases, quoted by 35 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from State v. Preston Adam Joy.

#Case FlagCanonical passage Citers
1 State v. Preston Adam Joy Anchor
idaho · 2013
green “a trial court has 'broad discretion' in determining whether to admit or exclude evidence, 'and its judgment in the fact finding role will only be disturbed on appeal when there has been a clear abuse of discretion.” 6
2 State v. Payne
idaho · 2008
green “where the alleged deficiency is counsel's failure to file a motion, a conclusion that the motion, if pursued, would not have been granted by the trial court, is generally determinative of both prongs of the strickland test.” 5
3 Stuart v. State
idaho · 1995
green “a factual finding is clearly erroneous only if it is not supported by 'substantial and competent evidence in the record.” 5
4 State v. Sheahan
idaho · 2003
green “both sides have traditionally been afforded considerable latitude in closing argument to the jury and are entitled to discuss fully, from their respective standpoints, the evidence and the inferences to be drawn therefrom.” 5
5 State v. Shackelford
idaho · 2010
green “(1) whether the court correctly perceived the issue as one of discretion; (2) whether the court acted within the outer boundaries of its discretion and consistently within the applicable legal standards; and (3) whether the court reached its decision by an exercise of reason.” 4
6 Giles v. State
idaho · 1994
green “strategic and tactical decisions will not be second guessed or serve as a basis for post-conviction relief under a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel unless the decision is shown to have resulted from inadequate preparation, ignorance of the relevant law or other shortco…” 4
7 State v. Gleason
idaho · 1992
green “appellant cannot now be heard to denounce testimony that he roused. this constitutes invited error.” 3
8 State v. Jeppesen
idaho · 2002
green “the idaho rules of evidence, except those relating to privileges, do not apply to sentencing hearings.” 3

A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.

← Caselaw search · Hot / Trending / Newly red · Brief Check