State v. Griffith

How courts have described this case

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

• invited error doctrine inapplicable where counsel sought the instruction \without any apparent tactical purpose\
• invited error doctrine inapplicable where counsel sought the instruction “without any apparent tactical purpose”
• “A defendant may not request a particular ruling by the trial court and later argue on appeal that the ruling was erroneous.”
• applying the invited error doctrine to a sentencing decision

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

10 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Studd
  Washington Supreme Court· 1999-04-01· cited 211×
• State v. Aubert
  Idaho Court of Appeals· 1991-06-19· cited 23×
• State v. PENTICO
  Idaho Court of Appeals· 2011-10-17· cited 18×
• State v. Leyva
  Idaho Court of Appeals· 1990-03-20· cited 14×
• Rodriguez v. State
  Idaho Court of Appeals· 1992-05-07· cited 7×
• State v. Carper
  Idaho Court of Appeals· 1989-05-08· cited 6×
• State v. Teddy Edghill Substitute
  Idaho Court of Appeals· 2014-01-10· cited 2×
• State v. Birky
  Idaho Court of Appeals· 1992-02-04· cited 1×
• State v. Teddy Edghill
  Idaho Court of Appeals· 2013-11-08
• State v. Cesar Gabriel Castrejon
  Idaho Court of Appeals· 2017-11-08

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. Owsley
  Idaho Supreme Court· 1983-12-07· cited 44×
• In Re Andrews
  California Supreme Court· 1976-10-22· cited 28×
• State v. Clevenger
  Supreme Court of Kansas· 1984-07-13· cited 13×
• Brosz v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1985-02-07· cited 5×
• Williams v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1982-08-03· cited 2×