Circuit split · criminal procedure
Whether probable cause is determined solely by an objective test or whether the officer's subjective state of mind is also relevant
1 federal appellate case on this question, each acknowledging the disagreement in its own words.
- Rashidi v. Albright39 F3D 1188
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals · October 31, 1994
“1 In other jurisdictions, there is a split of authority on the use of a solely objective test in finding probable cause.” — Split of authority
Empirical analysis of this case →
The other side of the split
Decisions the acknowledging court(s) named as the opposing or joined side, quoted in the acknowledging opinion's own words.
- Discussed · Cal.Sheldon Appel Co. v. Albert & Oliker765 P.2d 498
“Albert & Oliker, 765 P.2d 498, 506 (Cal.1989), the court stated that "because the malicious prosecution tort is intended to protect an individual's interest 'in freedom from unjustifiable and unreasonable litigation,' if the trial court determines that the prior action was objectively reasonable, the plaintiff has failed to meet the threshold requirement of demonstrating an absence of probable cause." (citations omitted).” — Rashidi v. Albright, acknowledging the split
- Discussed · Ariz.Bradshaw v. State Farm Mutual Auto Ins.758 P.2d 1313
“State Farm Mutual Auto Ins., 758 P.2d 1313, 1319 (Ariz.1988), the court held that the test for probable cause is subjective and objective.” — Rashidi v. Albright, acknowledging the split
Cases are grouped by the legal question they announce a split on, classified from the court's own acknowledgment sentence. Verified acknowledgments only. Counter-side decisions are extracted from the acknowledging opinions' own text and linked only when the citation resolves in this corpus. See all circuit splits.