Search
Filter Search
State v. Amble
Iowa Supreme Court revisited its 2021 decision in State v. Wright that the state's search and seizure clause requires police to obtain a warrant before searching garbage placed curbside for collection, finding that subsequent enactment of a state statute providing such garbage "shall be deemed abandoned property" means a warrant is no longer constitutionally required. The majority reasoned that Wright relied on "positive law" -- a local anti-scavening ordinance prohibiting anyone but licensed trash collectors from picking up trash -- to define private property rights, and the state statute changed that positive law by preempting the local ordinance. A dissent opined that the majority's position allows legislative "end-runs" of constitutional rights and disregards an overarching reasonable-expectation-of-privacy analysis.
Josh Kaul v. Wisconsin State Legislature
Wisconsin Supreme Court held a law giving a legislative committee authority to approve or disprove civil settlements reached by the state justice department violates separation of powers as applied to civil enforcement actions and civil cases brought on behalf of executive agencies. Settling these types of actions is within the core power of the executive branch, as the legislature has failed to demonstrate that doing so implicates an institutional interest giving lawmakers a shared constitutional role.
State v. James Ellis
Will consider whether restitution imposed as part of a criminal sentence is punishment subject to the limits on excessive fines in the federal and state constitutions and, if so, whether those clauses require sentencing courts to analyze the defendant’s ability to pay in setting the amount.
State v. Spencer
Illinois Supreme Court held that an aggregate 100-year prison sentence for a defendant who was 20 when the crimes occurred is not a de facto life sentence because a state statute makes first-degree murder defendants under 21 eligible for parole after 20 years and mandates that the reviewing board consider mitigating circumstances related to the defendant’s youth. The court further held that the the fact the sentence is not de facto life does not foreclose the defendant from bringing an as-applied challenge to his sentence under the state constitution’s “proportionate penalties” clause in a post-conviction petition.
Montana Environmental Information Center v. Office of the Governor
Montana Supreme Court held that a party who succeeds on a state constitutional “right to know” claim in a public records dispute is entitled to a presumption that they should be awarded attorneys’ fees. Two dissents opined that the holding was motivated by partisan bias.
Nathaniel M. Fouch
Nathaniel M. Fouch is a law professor at Capital University Law School in Columbus, Ohio.
The Education Wars Return to Ohio
A trial court found that Ohio’s voucher program violated the state constitutional educational guarantees and prohibitions on state funding of religious schools.
Wyoming Education Association vs. State
Trial court found Wyoming was underfunding public schools in violation of its state constitutional duty to provide an equal opportunity for a quality education, and ordered the state to modify its funding model. The state has appealed to the Wyoming Supreme Court.
State v. Sabra Danielson, State v. Simone Nelson
Will consider the defendants' argument that it violates equal protection to refund fines or fees paid in cash when a conviction is vacated, but not to reimburse defendants who performed community service at the equivalent of minimum wages to satisfy financial obligations they were unable to pay.
Grube v. Trader; State v. Rogan
Hawaii Supreme Court held that law requiring courts to "seal or otherwise remove all judiciary files" from any public electronic judicial database must be interpreted as providing two options to avoid state constitutional right to public access and separation of powers issues: removal of judicial records from the qualifying database, but keeping them publicly available for in-person review; or sealing of court records on a case-by-case basis, subject to procedural and substantive safeguards.
