Legal Opinion

State of Iowa v. Stephen Scott Prusha

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided February 12, 2016No. 14–0656PublishedCited by 37 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HECHT, Justice.

Stephen Prusha contends we should now decide the question we “reserved for another day” in State v. Pals, 805 N.W.2d 767, 782 (Iowa 2011): whether article I, section 8 of the Iowa Constitution requires police to “advise an individual of his or her right to decline to consent to a search.” However, we decline Prusha’s invitation and continue to leave the consent advisory question open because we conclude Prusha did not raise the Iowa Constitution when he challenged the search before the district court. We therefore evaluate the search in this case solely under the Fourth…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Schneckloth v. BustamonteSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  2. United States v. DraytonSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
  3. State of Iowa v. Randall Lee PalsSupreme Court of Iowa · 2011
  4. State Of Iowa Vs. Robert Joseph VanceSupreme Court of Iowa · 2010
  5. State v. FolkensSupreme Court of Iowa · 1979

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by37 opinions

  1. State of Iowa v. Kenneth Osborne ArySupreme Court of Iowa · 2016
  2. Cathryn Ann Linn v. State of IowaSupreme Court of Iowa · 2019
  3. State of Iowa v. Jayel Antrone ColemanSupreme Court of Iowa · 2017
  4. State of Iowa v. Kenneth L. LillySupreme Court of Iowa · 2019
  5. Roberto Morales Diaz v. State of IowaSupreme Court of Iowa · 2017

32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API