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 1898–2011 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 |
|---|---|---|
Smith v. Illinoisgreen2 sentences2011To forbid this most rudimentary inquiry at the threshold is effectively to emasculate the right of cross-examination itself.” Smith v. Illinois, 390 U.S. at 131 , 88 S.Ct. 748 . 2011To forbid this most rudimentary inquiry at the threshold is effectively to emasculate the right of cross-examination itself.” Smith v. Illinois, 390 U.S. at 131 , 88 S.Ct. 748 . | 1 | 3 |
Lowry v. Downeygreen2 sentences1923See, also, Lowery v. Downey (1898), 150 Ind. 364 , 50 N. E. 79 ; Levering v. Shockey (1885), 100 Ind. 558 ; Maris v. Iles, Admr. (1892), 3 Ind. App. 579 , 30 N. E. 152 . 1923See, also, Lowery v. Downey (1898), 150 Ind. 364 , 50 N. E. 79 ; Levering v. Shockey (1885), 100 Ind. 558 ; Maris v. Iles, Admr. (1892), 3 Ind. App. 579 , 30 N. E. 152 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Jackson v. State
green
1 sentence1992Additionally, as this Court stated in Jackson v. State (1989), Ind., 544 N.E.2d 853, 855 , "[whhile a trial judge has discretion to determine the seope of cross-examination and only clear abuse of that discretion is reversible, it is well established that a Sixth Amendment issue is raised when the trial court prohibits defense counsel from cross-examining altogether a crucial witness for the State on an area concerning his credibility." The State claims, however, that two other cases of this Court, Johnson, 518 N.E.2d 1073 , and Corbin, 563 N.E.2d 86 , require us to hold that, even if it were | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Johnson v. State
green
1 sentence1992Additionally, as this Court stated in Jackson v. State (1989), Ind., 544 N.E.2d 853, 855 , "[whhile a trial judge has discretion to determine the seope of cross-examination and only clear abuse of that discretion is reversible, it is well established that a Sixth Amendment issue is raised when the trial court prohibits defense counsel from cross-examining altogether a crucial witness for the State on an area concerning his credibility." The State claims, however, that two other cases of this Court, Johnson, 518 N.E.2d 1073 , and Corbin, 563 N.E.2d 86 , require us to hold that, even if it were | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Corbin v. State
green
1 sentence1992Additionally, as this Court stated in Jackson v. State (1989), Ind., 544 N.E.2d 853, 855 , "[whhile a trial judge has discretion to determine the seope of cross-examination and only clear abuse of that discretion is reversible, it is well established that a Sixth Amendment issue is raised when the trial court prohibits defense counsel from cross-examining altogether a crucial witness for the State on an area concerning his credibility." The State claims, however, that two other cases of this Court, Johnson, 518 N.E.2d 1073 , and Corbin, 563 N.E.2d 86 , require us to hold that, even if it were | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Levering v. Shockey
green
1 sentence1923See, also, Lowery v. Downey (1898), 150 Ind. 364 , 50 N. E. 79 ; Levering v. Shockey (1885), 100 Ind. 558 ; Maris v. Iles, Admr. (1892), 3 Ind. App. 579 , 30 N. E. 152 . | 1 | 1923–1923 |
Maris v. Iles
neutral
2 sentences1923See, also, Lowery v. Downey (1898), 150 Ind. 364 , 50 N. E. 79 ; Levering v. Shockey (1885), 100 Ind. 558 ; Maris v. Iles, Admr. (1892), 3 Ind. App. 579 , 30 N. E. 152 . 1923See, also, Lowery v. Downey (1898), 150 Ind. 364 , 50 N. E. 79 ; Levering v. Shockey (1885), 100 Ind. 558 ; Maris v. Iles, Admr. (1892), 3 Ind. App. 579 , 30 N. E. 152 . | 1 | 1923–1923 |
Pickett v. Green
neutral
1 sentence1898To hold otherwise would be to run counter to the rudimentary doctrine that it is always competent to prove the actual consideration yielded for the conveyance of land.” See, also, Pickett v. Green, 120 Ind. 584 ; Nichols, etc., Co. v. Burch, 128 Ind. 324 ; Smith v. Mc Clain, 146 Ind. 77 ; Pennsylvania Co. v. Dolan, 6 Ind. App. 109 . | 1 | 1898–1898 |
Nichols, Shepard & Co. v. Burch
green
1 sentence1898To hold otherwise would be to run counter to the rudimentary doctrine that it is always competent to prove the actual consideration yielded for the conveyance of land.” See, also, Pickett v. Green, 120 Ind. 584 ; Nichols, etc., Co. v. Burch, 128 Ind. 324 ; Smith v. Mc Clain, 146 Ind. 77 ; Pennsylvania Co. v. Dolan, 6 Ind. App. 109 . | 1 | 1898–1898 |
Smith v. McClain
green
1 sentence1898To hold otherwise would be to run counter to the rudimentary doctrine that it is always competent to prove the actual consideration yielded for the conveyance of land.” See, also, Pickett v. Green, 120 Ind. 584 ; Nichols, etc., Co. v. Burch, 128 Ind. 324 ; Smith v. Mc Clain, 146 Ind. 77 ; Pennsylvania Co. v. Dolan, 6 Ind. App. 109 . | 1 | 1898–1898 |
Pennsylvania Co. v. Dolan
green
1 sentence1898To hold otherwise would be to run counter to the rudimentary doctrine that it is always competent to prove the actual consideration yielded for the conveyance of land.” See, also, Pickett v. Green, 120 Ind. 584 ; Nichols, etc., Co. v. Burch, 128 Ind. 324 ; Smith v. Mc Clain, 146 Ind. 77 ; Pennsylvania Co. v. Dolan, 6 Ind. App. 109 . | 1 | 1898–1898 |
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.