North Dakota Supreme Court· 6/30/2004
State v. DeCoteau
Citations
- 2004 ND 139
- 681 N.W.2d 803
- 2004 N.D. LEXIS 236
- 2004 WL 1462544
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- reasoning that a one-week interval between knowledge of the suspension and the current stop did not render the information stale nor the stop unreasonable
- recognizing reasonable suspicion despite the possibility that \the driver's license may have been reinstated in the intervening week\
- reasoning that a one-week interval between knowledge of the suspension and the current stop did not render the information stale nor the stop unreasonable
- recognizing reasonable suspicion despite the possibility that “the driver’s license may have been reinstated in the intervening week”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Kapsner, Vande Walle, Maring, Neumann, Sandstrom
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
16 cases in this archive cite this case.
- State v. SpillnerHawaii Supreme Court· 2007-12-24· cited 33×
- State v. SkarsgardNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2007-10-16· cited 31×
- City of Dickinson v. HewsonNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2011-09-15· cited 21×
- State v. HolbachNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2007-07-25· cited 16×
- State v. WashingtonNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2007-08-22· cited 14×
- State v. WestmillerNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2007-04-10· cited 10×
- City of Mandan v. GerhardtNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2010-06-15· cited 9×
- State v. OstbyNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2014-09-23· cited 9×
- Sturn v. Director, North Dakota Department of TransportationNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2009-04-02· cited 5×
- State v. PedersonNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2011-08-18· cited 5×
- Gaede v. StateNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2011-08-18· cited 4×
- State v. McLarenNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2009-10-13· cited 3×
- State v. OwensNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2011-09-15· cited 2×
- State v. JamesNew Mexico Court of Appeals· 2017-04-10· cited 2×
- Delzer v. AndersonNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2009-04-02
- Interest of O.F., a childNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2009-10-13
Cites
28 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- State v. YearganTennessee Supreme Court· 1997-11-24· cited 776×
- State v. WithrowSupreme Court of Missouri· 1999-12-07· cited 146×
- City of St. Paul v. VaughnSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1975-12-12· cited 90×
- State v. GreggNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2000-08-18· cited 67×
- Commonwealth v. StevensonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 2003-09-16· cited 62×
- Commonwealth v. DeramoMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 2002-02-08· cited 59×
- Moody v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 2003-01-23· cited 46×
- Lapp v. North Dakota Department of TransportationNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2001-07-25· cited 32×
- State v. GuscetteNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2004-04-13· cited 30×
- State v. DuesterhoeftSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1981-11-06· cited 27×
- State v. HarrisCourt of Appeals of Georgia· 1999-02-01· cited 26×
- Kappel v. Director, ND Department of TransportationNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 1999-12-01· cited 25×
- State v. CorumNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2003-06-05· cited 25×
- State v. LeyvaDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 1992-05-12· cited 23×
- Coastal Marshlands Protection Committee v. Center for a Sustainable CoastCourt of Appeals of Georgia· 2007-07-11· cited 22×
- Hanson v. Director, North Dakota Department of TransportationNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2003-11-17· cited 20×
- State v. KeilenNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2002-08-15· cited 16×
- State v. MischeNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 1989-11-20· cited 12×
- Stone v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 2003-10-22· cited 12×
- State v. GibsonUtah Supreme Court· 1983-06-10· cited 11×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.