Allen v. Roach

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that expert testimony is permissible where it may “assist[] the jury in understanding some peculiar aspect of the victim’s behavior” and does not “involve a comment on the credibility or truthfulness of the victim”
• explaining that courts will not consider issues that were not thoroughly raised by the parties
• concluding counsel's decision to play child victim's forensic interview at trial to show victim's lies and inconsistencies, thereby undermining her credibility, was sound trial strategy in a case where the only evidence of the crime was the victim's story
• noting longstanding precedent that this Court “will not frame the issues for the litigants and will not consider issues not raised by them and not supported by cogent argument and authoritative citation.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).