green
Positive treatment
Trending · 166 recent citers
Quoted verbatim 1×
11.6 score
“ome excited utterances are testimonial, and others are not, depending upon the circumstances”
Treatment trajectory · 2006 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2006
2016
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 21 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
State v. Slater
ome excited utterances are testimonial, and others are not, depending upon the circumstances
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Larrinaga, Alcides
(2×)
App. 2005) cert denied 548 U.S. 926 2006.............................11,13 Walters vs.
discussed
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Alexis Gonzalez.
See Commonwealth v. Nardi, 452 Mass. 379 , 388 n.10 (2008). 3 As recognized in Wardsworth, the Supreme Judicial Court previously used a different test, which, at least for statements not made to law enforcement personnel, asked whether "a reasonable person in the declarant's position would anticipate his statement being used against the accused in investigating and prosecuting a crime." 482 Mass. at 464 n.18, quoting Commonwealth v. Gonsalves, 445 Mass. 1, 3 (2005), cert. denied, 548 U.S. 926 (2006).
cited
Cited "see"
Greene v. Comm'r of Corr.
See State v. Greene , 274 Conn. 134 , 139, 874 A.2d 750 (2005), cert. denied, 548 U.S. 926 , 126 S.Ct. 2981 , 165 L.Ed. 2d 988 (2006).
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Imbert
See Commonwealth v. Gonsalves , 445 Mass. 1 , 34, 833 N.E.2d 549 (2005), cert. denied, **581 548 U.S. 926 , 126 S.Ct. 2980 , 165 L.Ed.2d 990 (2006).
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Tran
See Commonwealth v. Gonsalves, 445 Mass. 1, 14 (2005), cert. denied, 548 U.S. 926 (2006).
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Zeininger
See Commonwealth v. Gonsalves, 445 Mass. 1, 14 (2005), cert, denied, 548 U.S. 926 (2006).
discussed
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Shangkuan
See Melendez-Diaz, 129 S. Ct. at 2531 (quoting this language). 1 It is this type of hearsay that is described by the test articulated by our Supreme Judicial Court for determining when hearsay that is not “per se” testimonial is, nonetheless, “testimonial in fact.” See Commonwealth v. Gonsalves, 445 Mass. 1, 12 (2005), cert, denied, 548 U.S. 926 (2006) (Gonsalves) 2 The Supreme Judicial Court has explained that “[t]he proper inquiry is whether a reasonable person in the declarant’s position would anticipate the statement’s being used against the accused in investigating and prose…
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Chimenti
See State v. Greene, 274 Conn. 134, 160-62 , 874 A.2d 750 (2005) (modifying judgment of conviction after reversal when record establishes fact finder found beyond a reasonable doubt all essential elements of lesser included offense), cert. denied, 548 U.S. 926 , 126 S. Ct. 2981 , 165 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Diaz
See Commonwealth v. Nesbitt, 452 Mass. 236 , 242-243 & n.10 (2008). “ [Statements made in response to questioning by law enforcement agents are per se testimonial, except where the questioning is meant to secure a volatile scene or to establish the need for or provide medical care,” Commonwealth v. Gonsalves, 445 Mass. 1, 3 (2005), cert, denied, 548 U.S. 926 (2006) , and are inadmissible unless the declarant was “unavailable to testify, and the defendant had had a prior opportunity for cross-examination.” Crawford v. Washington, supra at 54.
examined
Cited "see"
State v. Ray
(4×)
We note that, although the dissent has cited a number of cases in which this court ordered the modification of a judgment of conviction to reflect a lesser included offense when we concluded that the trial court had applied an improper legal standard; see State v. Greene, 274 Conn. 134, 153-62 , 874 A.2d 750 (2005), cert, denied, 548 U.S. 926 , 126 S. Ct. 2981 , 165 L.
cited
Cited "see"
Stringer v. State
See Russeau v. State, 171 S.W.3d 871, 880-81 (Tex.Crim.App.2005), cert. denied, 548 U.S. 926 , 126 S.Ct. 2982 , 165 L.Ed.2d 989 (2006). .
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Fana
See State v. Greene, 274 Conn. 134, 155 , 874 A.2d 750 (2005), cert. denied, 548 U.S. 926 , 126 S. Ct. 2981 , 165 L.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Commonwealth v. Rodriguez
See also United States v. Brito, 427 F.3d 53, 61-62 (1st Cir. 2005), cert denied, 548 U.S. 926 (2006).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Commonwealth v. Ortiz
See also Commonwealth v. Gonsalves, 445 Mass. 1, 12-13 (2005), cert. denied, 548 U.S. 926 (2006) (explaining that in determining whether hearsay is testimonial in fact “proper inquiry is whether a reasonable person in the declarant’s position would anticipate the statement’s being used against the accused in investigating and prosecuting a crime”).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Revis v. State
See also Calhoun v. State, 932 So.2d 923 (Ala.Crim.App.2005), cert. denied, 548 U.S. 926 , 126 S.Ct. 2984 , 165 L.Ed.2d 990 (2006) (no reversible error when prosecutor commented that the defendant’s mother got to plead for his life but that the victim’s mother did not get to plead for her son’s life); Lewis v. State, 889 So.2d 623 (Ala. Crim.App.2003) (no reversible error when prosecutor argued that jury should consider the rights of the people living in the county in which the victim lived); Johnson v. State, 820 So.2d 842 (Ala.Crim.App.2000), aff'd, 820 So.2d 883 (Ala.2001), cert. deni…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
McCray v. State
See also Calhoun v. State, 932 So.2d 923 (Ala.Crim.App. 2005), cert. denied, 548 U.S. 926 , 126 S.Ct. 2984 , 165 L.Ed.2d 990 (2006) (no reversible error when prosecutor commented that the defendant’s mother got to plead for his life but that the victim’s mother did not get to plead for her son’s life); Lewis v. State, 889 So.2d 623 (Ala.Crim.App.2003) (no reversible error when prosecutor argued that jury should consider the rights of the people living in the county in which the victim lived); Johnson v. State, 820 So.2d 842 (Ala.Crim.App.2000), aff'd, 820 So.2d 883 (Ala.2001), cert. deni…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Commonwealth v. Barbosa
See also Commonwealth v. Gonsalves, 445 Mass. 1, 3 (2005), cert, denied, 548 U.S. 926 (2006) (testimonial nature determined by “whether a reasonable person in the declarant’s position would anticipate his statement being used against the accused in investigating and prosecuting a crime”).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Solek v. Commissioner of Correction
In this case, however, because we conclude that the claims were abandoned, we do not reach the issue of procedural default. 3 The four-pronged Whistnant test for whether a court failed to charge on a lesser included offense provides: “A defendant is entitled to an instruction on a lesser offense if, and only if ... (1) an appropriate instruction is requested by either the state or the defendant; (2) it is not possible to commit the greater offense, in the manner described in the information or bill of particulars, without having first committed the lesser; (3) there is some evidence, introdu…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Brown v. State
See also Calhoun v. State, 932 So.2d 923 (Ala.Crim.App.2005), cert. denied, 548 U.S. 926 , 126 S.Ct. 2984 , 165 L.Ed.2d 990 (2006) (no reversible error when prosecutor commented that the defendant’s mother got to plead for his life but that the victim’s mother did not get to plead for her son’s life); Lewis v. State, 889 So.2d 623 (Ala.Crim.App.2003) (no reversible error when prosecutor argued that jury should consider the rights of the people living in the county in which the victim lived); Johnson v. State, 820 So.2d 842 (Ala.Crim.App.2000), aff'd, 820 So.2d 883 (Ala.2001), cert. denie…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Fabricatore
See, e.g., State v. Greene, 274 Conn. 134, 151 , 874 A.2d 750 (2005) (“[a]lmost without exception, we have *482 required that a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel must be raised by way of habeas corpus, rather than by direct appeal, because of the need for a full evidentiary record for such [a] claim” [internal quotation marks omitted]), cert. denied, 548 U.S. 926 , 126 S. Ct. 2981 , 165 L.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
GONSALVES
v.
MASSACHUSETTS.
v.
MASSACHUSETTS.
05-8485.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 30, 2006.
Published
Citer courts: Connecticut Appellate Court (1)
Certiorari denied.