In re: The Honorable Joe Don McGaugh

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that to establish exi- gent circumstances, the state “must prove that it could not obtain a warrant through reasonable steps, which include utilizing available processes for electronic warrants”
• expressing that, where the fruits of a warrantless seizure are challenged through a motion to suppress, the state bears the burden of proving that exigent circumstances “actually existed at the time of the seizure”
• overruling precedent that established per se exigency rule under state constitution in 1986 to now require the state to “prove that it could not obtain a warrant through reasonable steps, which include utilizing available processes for electronic warrants”
• overruling precedent that established per se exigency rule under state constitution in 1986 to now require the state to “prove that it could not obtain a warrant through reasonable steps, which include utilizing available processes for electronic warrants”
• “this court is willing to reconsider an earlier decision when it appears that the decision was incorrect, especially if, in making the decision, the court did not apply its usual interpretative methodology or was not presented with an important argument.”
• “this court is willing to reconsider an earlier decision when it appears that the decision was incorrect, especially if, in making the decision, the court did not apply its usual interpretative methodology or was not presented with an important argument”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).