Godfrey v. State
| Docket Number | 19-1954 |
| Decision Date | 30 June 2021 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
6 cases
-
Planned Parenthood of the Heartland, Inc. v. Reynolds ex rel. State
...in part and dissenting in part); see also Wagner v. State , 952 N.W.2d 843, 858 (Iowa 2020) (describing the Chief Justice's opinion in Godfrey as "dispositive").3 It may be worth noting that in 2021, both the house and the senate approved a constitutional amendment as follows: "[W]e the peo......
-
State v. Koat
..."[t]he standard of relevance for the admission of evidence generally is not a high bar." Godfrey v. State , 962 N.W.2d 84, 119 (Iowa 2021) (Appel, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part). "Evidence is relevant if ... [i]t has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it ......
-
Stansbury v. Sioux City Cmty. Sch. Dist.
...But direct evidence of a discriminatory motive is rarely trumpeted by the employer and is almost never available. See Godfrey v. State, 962 N.W.2d 84, 123 (Iowa 2021) (Appel, J., dissenting). If the plaintiff offers only indirect evidence, courts follow the framework established in McDonnel......
Request a trial to view additional results