Ramos v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• testimony of dog-handler and police officer insufficient, by itself, to establish reliability of dog scent-discrimination lineups
• “[I]t is important to recognize that using a dog to track a human or to detect the presence of drugs or explosives is distinctive from using a dog to directly identify a specific human from items in a lineup.”
• \[I]t is important to recognize that using a dog to track a human or to detect the presence of drugs or explosives is distinctive from using a dog to directly identify a specific human from items in a lineup.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Winfrey v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 2010-09-22· cited 142×
• Ramirez v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1995-01-05· cited 72×
• Ramirez v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1989-03-16· cited 45×
• State v. Buller
  Supreme Court of Iowa· 1994-05-25· cited 31×
• Winfrey, Richard Lynn Sr.
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 2010-09-22

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Florida v. Royer
  Supreme Court· 1983-03-23· cited 6,728×
• Bundy v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1985-05-09· cited 135×
• Zeigler v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1981-06-11· cited 111×
• Sedelbauer v. Indiana
  Supreme Court· 1982-03-22· cited 71×
• Walsh v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1982-07-29· cited 23×
• Davis v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1903-06-15· cited 18×
• State v. Bankston
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1983-06-07· cited 8×
• Edwards v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1980-12-11· cited 4×