In Re the Welfare of D.A.G.

How courts have described this case

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

• finding the State had “wholly failed to provide facts to support the existence of exigent circumstances under the ‘single factor’ test”
• finding the State had \wholly failed to provide facts to support the existence of exigent circumstances under the `single factor' test\
• rejecting State’s contention that warrantless entry into home was justified by the imminent destruction of evidence because the State had “not advanced a theory” and had “failed to provide facts” explaining how the drugs the officers saw “would have suddenly disappeared”
• rejecting State's contention that warrantless entry into home was justified by the imminent destruction of evidence because the State had \not advanced a theory\ and had \failed to provide facts\ explaining how the drugs the officers saw \would have suddenly disappeared\
• “[W]e make our own evaluation of the found facts in determining whether exigent circumstances exist.”
• although several of these cases have been questioned, legal research shows that the cases retain precedential value. Moreover, the cases serve to illustrate that there is, in fact, a split of authority as to how Matlock should be interpreted

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).