Brannen v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• “[B]ecause the edited portion of the tape that was played for the jury was not misleading or confusing, the exculpatory statements that were excised as hearsay were not necessary or admissible on grounds of testimonial completeness.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Steffensen v. State
  Court of Appeals of Alaska· 1995-07-28· cited 3×
• Kelly v. State
  Court of Appeals of Alaska· 2005-07-08· cited 2×
• Charlie Willie Steven v. State of Alaska
  Court of Appeals of Alaska· 2023-11-09· cited 1×

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Hawley v. State
  Alaska Supreme Court· 1980-07-25· cited 97×
• Stumpf v. State
  Court of Appeals of Alaska· 1988-01-22· cited 29×
• United States v. Orozco
  S.D. California· 1986-03-28· cited 20×
• United States v. Bernard Harrigan
  First Circuit· 1977-06-20· cited 18×
• State v. Agoney
  Alaska Supreme Court· 1980-03-28· cited 18×
• Doisher v. State
  Alaska Supreme Court· 1983-03-15· cited 13×
• Jones v. State
  Court of Appeals of Alaska· 1982-06-04· cited 12×
• Gallagher v. State
  Court of Appeals of Alaska· 1982-10-01· cited 11×