Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 2000–2017 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Indiana courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Cooper v. Stategreen2 sentences2013See, e.g., McClain v. State, 675 N.E.2d 329, 331 (Ind.1996) (establishing two-prong test for admissibility of child victim hearsay under Rule 803(4) but finding the requisite indicia of reliability missing from the record); Cooper v. State, 714 N.E.2d 689, 692-93 (Ind.Ct.App.1999), trans. denied (applying McClain test to admit a child victim’s statements to a nurse during a physical examination). 2013See, e.g., McClain v. State, 675 N.E.2d 329, 331 (Ind. 1996) (establishing two-prong test for admissibility of child victim hearsay under Rule 803(4) but finding the requisite indicia of reliability missing from the record); Cooper v. State, 714 N.E.2d 689 , 692–93 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999), trans. denied (applying McClain test to admit a child victim’s statements to a nurse during a physical examination). 4 (A) conducted outside the presence of the jury; and (B) attended by the protected person in person or by using closed circuit television testimony as described in section 8(f) and 8(g) of this | 2 | 2 |
McClain v. Stategreen2 sentences2017The court found that the testimony failed the first prong of the McClain test because the record was “devoid of any evidence ... that the children, in making these statements, were ‘motivated to provide truthful information in order to promote diagnosis and treatment.’ ” Id. at 533 (quoting McClain, 675 N.E.2d at 331 ). 2017The court found that the testimony failed the first prong of the McClain test because the record was “devoid of any evidence ... that the children, in making these statements, were ‘motivated to provide truthful information in order to promote diagnosis and treatment.’ ” Id. at 533 (quoting McClain, 675 N.E.2d at 331 ). | 1 | 2 |
McClain v. Stategreen2 sentences2005See McClain, 678 N.E.2d at 107 . 2005See McClain, 678 N.E.2d at 107 . | 1 | 2 |
Gerald P. VanPatten v. State of Indianagreen2 sentences2017It observed that the only statements relevant to the first prong of the McClain test were the nurse’s statement that she tells children “[i]t’s my job to make sure that you’re okay,” and her affirmative response to the question “[s]o you ask general health issues and you also talk to them about why you’re there to see them and provide treatment to them?” Id. at 266. 2017It observed that the only statements relevant to the first prong of the McClain test were the nurse’s statement that she tells children “[i]t’s my job to make sure that you’re okay,” and her affirmative response to the question “[s]o you ask general health issues and you also talk to them about why you’re there to see them and provide treatment to them?” Id. at 266. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In Re WB
green
2 sentences2017The court found that the testimony failed the first prong of the McClain test because the record was “devoid of any evidence ... that the children, in making these statements, were ‘motivated to provide truthful information in order to promote diagnosis and treatment.’ ” Id. at 533 (quoting McClain, 675 N.E.2d at 331 ). 2017The court found that the testimony failed the first prong of the McClain test because the record was “devoid of any evidence ... that the children, in making these statements, were ‘motivated to provide truthful information in order to promote diagnosis and treatment.’ ” Id. at 533 (quoting McClain, 675 N.E.2d at 331 ). | 2 | 2013–2017 |
In Re Paternity of HRM
green
2 sentences2013And unlike in Cooper, the social worker’s testimony “did not indicate that she explained to H.R.M. the purpose of the interview, or that H.R.M. knew she was at the interview to facilitate medical diagnosis and treatment.” Id. 10 Accordingly, the Court of Appeals found that the social worker’s testimony failed the first prong of the McClain test and was therefore improperly admitted. 2013And unlike in Cooper, the social worker’s testimony “did not indicate that she explained to H.R.M. the purpose of the interview, or that H.R.M. knew she was at the interview to facilitate medical diagnosis and treatment.” Id. 10 Accordingly, the Court of Appeals found that the social worker’s testimony failed the first prong of the McClain test and was therefore improperly admitted. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Sams v. State
green
1 sentence2008In Sams , we affirmed the defendant’s conviction despite the erroneous admission of the defendant’s driving record because we found that the error was harmless. 688 N.E.2d at 1326 . | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.