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.
6 North Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 2006–2026 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by North Carolina 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 |
|---|---|---|
United States v. Oscar Rosa, Vincent Lopez, Ricardo Rodriguez, Hector Hernandez, and Armando Velasquezgreen2 sentences2007See, e.g., United States v. Rosa, 11 F.3d 315, 333 (2d Cir.1993) (New York City medical examiner's written autopsy report is admissible as public record under Fed.R.Evid. 803(8)), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1042 , 114 S.Ct. 1565 , 128 L.Ed.2d 211 (1994); State v. Davis, 141 S.W.3d 600, 630 (Tenn.2004) ("The autopsy reports are admissible hearsay under Rules 803(6) and 803(8) of the Tennessee Rules of Evidence."), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 1156 , 125 S.Ct. 1306 , 161 L.Ed.2d 123 (2005); Tex. Workers' Comp. 2007See, e.g., United States v. Rosa, 11 F.3d 315 , 333 (2d Cir.1993) (New York City medical examiner's written autopsy report is admissible as public record under Fed.R.Evid. 803(8)), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1042 , 114 S.Ct. 1565 , 128 L.Ed.2d 211 (1994); State v. Davis, 141 S.W.3d 600 , 630 (Tenn.2004) ("The autopsy reports are admissible hearsay under Rules 803(6) and 803(8) of the Tennessee Rules of Evidence."), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 1156 , 125 S.Ct. 1306 , 161 L.Ed.2d 123 (2005); Tex. Workers' Comp. | 2 | 2 |
Jolivet v. Immigration & Naturalization Servicegreen2 sentences2007See, e.g., United States v. Rosa, 11 F.3d 315, 333 (2d Cir.1993) (New York City medical examiner's written autopsy report is admissible as public record under Fed.R.Evid. 803(8)), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1042 , 114 S.Ct. 1565 , 128 L.Ed.2d 211 (1994); State v. Davis, 141 S.W.3d 600, 630 (Tenn.2004) ("The autopsy reports are admissible hearsay under Rules 803(6) and 803(8) of the Tennessee Rules of Evidence."), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 1156 , 125 S.Ct. 1306 , 161 L.Ed.2d 123 (2005); Tex. Workers' Comp. 2007See, e.g., United States v. Rosa, 11 F.3d 315 , 333 (2d Cir.1993) (New York City medical examiner's written autopsy report is admissible as public record under Fed.R.Evid. 803(8)), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1042 , 114 S.Ct. 1565 , 128 L.Ed.2d 211 (1994); State v. Davis, 141 S.W.3d 600 , 630 (Tenn.2004) ("The autopsy reports are admissible hearsay under Rules 803(6) and 803(8) of the Tennessee Rules of Evidence."), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 1156 , 125 S.Ct. 1306 , 161 L.Ed.2d 123 (2005); Tex. Workers' Comp. | 2 | 2 |
Van Sickle v. McGinnisgreen2 sentences2007See, e.g., United States v. Rosa, 11 F.3d 315, 333 (2d Cir.1993) (New York City medical examiner's written autopsy report is admissible as public record under Fed.R.Evid. 803(8)), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1042 , 114 S.Ct. 1565 , 128 L.Ed.2d 211 (1994); State v. Davis, 141 S.W.3d 600, 630 (Tenn.2004) ("The autopsy reports are admissible hearsay under Rules 803(6) and 803(8) of the Tennessee Rules of Evidence."), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 1156 , 125 S.Ct. 1306 , 161 L.Ed.2d 123 (2005); Tex. Workers' Comp. 2007See, e.g., United States v. Rosa, 11 F.3d 315 , 333 (2d Cir.1993) (New York City medical examiner's written autopsy report is admissible as public record under Fed.R.Evid. 803(8)), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1042 , 114 S.Ct. 1565 , 128 L.Ed.2d 211 (1994); State v. Davis, 141 S.W.3d 600 , 630 (Tenn.2004) ("The autopsy reports are admissible hearsay under Rules 803(6) and 803(8) of the Tennessee Rules of Evidence."), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 1156 , 125 S.Ct. 1306 , 161 L.Ed.2d 123 (2005); Tex. Workers' Comp. | 2 | 2 |
State v. Davisgreen2 sentences2007See, e.g., United States v. Rosa, 11 F.3d 315, 333 (2d Cir.1993) (New York City medical examiner's written autopsy report is admissible as public record under Fed.R.Evid. 803(8)), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1042 , 114 S.Ct. 1565 , 128 L.Ed.2d 211 (1994); State v. Davis, 141 S.W.3d 600, 630 (Tenn.2004) ("The autopsy reports are admissible hearsay under Rules 803(6) and 803(8) of the Tennessee Rules of Evidence."), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 1156 , 125 S.Ct. 1306 , 161 L.Ed.2d 123 (2005); Tex. Workers' Comp. 2007See, e.g., United States v. Rosa, 11 F.3d 315 , 333 (2d Cir.1993) (New York City medical examiner's written autopsy report is admissible as public record under Fed.R.Evid. 803(8)), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1042 , 114 S.Ct. 1565 , 128 L.Ed.2d 211 (1994); State v. Davis, 141 S.W.3d 600 , 630 (Tenn.2004) ("The autopsy reports are admissible hearsay under Rules 803(6) and 803(8) of the Tennessee Rules of Evidence."), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 1156 , 125 S.Ct. 1306 , 161 L.Ed.2d 123 (2005); Tex. Workers' Comp. | 1 | 2 |
State v. Sharpegreen2 sentences2026See Sharpe, 344 N.C. at 194 , 473 S.E.2d at 5 (citation omitted). 2026See Sharpe, 344 N.C. at 194 , 473 S.E.2d at 5 (citation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Bolick v. Sunbird Airlines, Inc.green2 sentences2026Furthermore, even if the report itself falls within the public records exception, “any hearsay contained in the report must also fall under one of the hearsay exceptions.” See Bolick v. Sunbird Airlines, Inc., 96 N.C. 2026App. 443, 446 , 386 S.E.2d 76, 77 (1989) (citation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Fortegreen2 sentences2008As a result, we must determine whether these reports are admissible under Rule 803(8) before we can decide whether they are admissible as business records.” State v. Forte, 360 N.C. 427, 436 , 629 S.E.2d 137, 144 (2006) (citation omitted). 2008As a result, we must determine whether these reports are admissible under Rule 803(8) before we can decide whether they are admissible as business records.” State v. Forte, 360 N.C. 427, 436 , 629 S.E.2d 137, 144 (2006) (citation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Frank Grady and John Jankowskigreen2 sentences2006United States v. Grady, 544 F.2d 598, 604 (2d Cir.1976). 2006United States v. Grady, 544 F.2d 598, 604 (2d Cir. 1976). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Woodygreen1 sentence2006App. 576, 578 , 402 S.E.2d 848, 850 (1991) (“[Receiving the civil part of the revocation order into evidence to show that defendant’s driver’s license was revoked and he knew it was authorized by the public records exception to the hearsay rule.”). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Plonka v. Brown
neutral
2 sentences2007See, e.g., United States v. Rosa, 11 F.3d 315, 333 (2d Cir.1993) (New York City medical examiner's written autopsy report is admissible as public record under Fed.R.Evid. 803(8)), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1042 , 114 S.Ct. 1565 , 128 L.Ed.2d 211 (1994); State v. Davis, 141 S.W.3d 600, 630 (Tenn.2004) ("The autopsy reports are admissible hearsay under Rules 803(6) and 803(8) of the Tennessee Rules of Evidence."), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 1156 , 125 S.Ct. 1306 , 161 L.Ed.2d 123 (2005); Tex. Workers' Comp. 2007See, e.g., United States v. Rosa, 11 F.3d 315 , 333 (2d Cir.1993) (New York City medical examiner's written autopsy report is admissible as public record under Fed.R.Evid. 803(8)), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1042 , 114 S.Ct. 1565 , 128 L.Ed.2d 211 (1994); State v. Davis, 141 S.W.3d 600 , 630 (Tenn.2004) ("The autopsy reports are admissible hearsay under Rules 803(6) and 803(8) of the Tennessee Rules of Evidence."), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 1156 , 125 S.Ct. 1306 , 161 L.Ed.2d 123 (2005); Tex. Workers' Comp. | 2 | 2007–2007 |
Ash v. Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County
neutral
2 sentences2007See, e.g., United States v. Rosa, 11 F.3d 315, 333 (2d Cir.1993) (New York City medical examiner's written autopsy report is admissible as public record under Fed.R.Evid. 803(8)), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1042 , 114 S.Ct. 1565 , 128 L.Ed.2d 211 (1994); State v. Davis, 141 S.W.3d 600, 630 (Tenn.2004) ("The autopsy reports are admissible hearsay under Rules 803(6) and 803(8) of the Tennessee Rules of Evidence."), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 1156 , 125 S.Ct. 1306 , 161 L.Ed.2d 123 (2005); Tex. Workers' Comp. 2007See, e.g., United States v. Rosa, 11 F.3d 315 , 333 (2d Cir.1993) (New York City medical examiner's written autopsy report is admissible as public record under Fed.R.Evid. 803(8)), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1042 , 114 S.Ct. 1565 , 128 L.Ed.2d 211 (1994); State v. Davis, 141 S.W.3d 600 , 630 (Tenn.2004) ("The autopsy reports are admissible hearsay under Rules 803(6) and 803(8) of the Tennessee Rules of Evidence."), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 1156 , 125 S.Ct. 1306 , 161 L.Ed.2d 123 (2005); Tex. Workers' Comp. | 2 | 2007–2007 |
McKeithan v. Lavan, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution at Dallas
green
2 sentences2007See, e.g., United States v. Rosa, 11 F.3d 315, 333 (2d Cir.1993) (New York City medical examiner's written autopsy report is admissible as public record under Fed.R.Evid. 803(8)), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1042 , 114 S.Ct. 1565 , 128 L.Ed.2d 211 (1994); State v. Davis, 141 S.W.3d 600, 630 (Tenn.2004) ("The autopsy reports are admissible hearsay under Rules 803(6) and 803(8) of the Tennessee Rules of Evidence."), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 1156 , 125 S.Ct. 1306 , 161 L.Ed.2d 123 (2005); Tex. Workers' Comp. 2007See, e.g., United States v. Rosa, 11 F.3d 315 , 333 (2d Cir.1993) (New York City medical examiner's written autopsy report is admissible as public record under Fed.R.Evid. 803(8)), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1042 , 114 S.Ct. 1565 , 128 L.Ed.2d 211 (1994); State v. Davis, 141 S.W.3d 600 , 630 (Tenn.2004) ("The autopsy reports are admissible hearsay under Rules 803(6) and 803(8) of the Tennessee Rules of Evidence."), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 1156 , 125 S.Ct. 1306 , 161 L.Ed.2d 123 (2005); Tex. Workers' Comp. | 2 | 2007–2007 |
United States v. William Weiland
green
1 sentence2006We agree “that ‘the sources of the information or other circumstances’ in this case do not ‘indicate lack of trustworthiness.’ ” Id. at 1075 (quoting Fed. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.