Utah Supreme Court· 4/23/1991

State v. Ramirez

Citations

817 P.2d 774
159 Utah Adv. Rep. 7
1991 Utah LEXIS 33
1991 WL 74577

How courts have described this case

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

holding that appellate court cannot assume trial court would have found facts to support its decision when ambiguity of facts makes such an assumption unreasonable
holding that appellate court cannot assume trial court would have found facts to support its decision when ambiguity of facts makes such an assumption unreasonable
holding that determination of “the due process reliability of eyewitness identifications .... will require an in-depth appraisal of the identification’s reliability”
concluding that the standard for admissibility of eyewitness identifications under Article I, Section 7 of the Utah Constitution diverges from the standard under the federal Due Process Clause
stating that several standards of review must be employed given that the trial court’s determination of admissibility involves both legal and factual conclusions
stating that due process analysis for determining admissibility of eyewitness identifications under Utah Constitution will meet or exceed in rigor the federal standard

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Zimmerman, Hall, Howe, Durham, Stewart

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

160 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

62 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

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.