State v. Allen

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that \[e]xclusion is only appropriate where the remedial objectives of the exclusionary rule are served\
• observing that this court reviews a statute to determine its plain meaning, which is intended to reflect legislative intent
• good faith exception did not apply when officer failed to attach affidavit to search warrant, which was unambiguously required by law
• \Exclusion is only appropriate where the remedial objectives of the exclusionary rule are served.\
• \Exclusion is only appropriate where the remedial objectives of the exclusionary rule are served.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Bayard
  Nevada Supreme Court· 2003-06-26· cited 14×
• State v. Kincade
  Nevada Supreme Court· 2013-12-26· cited 3×
• State v. Gameros-Perez
  Nevada Supreme Court· 2003-11-03· cited 2×
• Smith v. State
  Nevada Supreme Court· 2024-03-28· cited 2×
• Byars v. State
  Nevada Supreme Court· 2014-10-16
• SHARPE (PHILLIP) VS. STATE
  Nevada Supreme Court· 2015-06-04
• Indico (Elinor) Vs. State
  Nevada Supreme Court· 2019-10-24
• ACOSTA (XAVIER) v. STATE
  Nevada Supreme Court· 2025-08-21