Byron Nelson Griggs v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that “[a] prior consistent statement cannot be used as a means of proving ‘new points not covered in the testimony’ of the declarant” (citation omitted)
• noting that “an error in admission of hearsay is not 3 Mr. Brown asserts that the challenged evidence could not have been admitted as “prior consistent statements” under W.R.E. 801(d)(1)(B
• noting that Rule 404(b) determinations are not made in the first instance on appeal
• holding a prior consistent statement was admissible when a forensic interviewer testified to statements children made to her, though the interviewer used the word “crotch,” and the children testified using the terms “bad area” and “private spot.”
• outlining “[t]he factors that should be considered in assessing the reliability of a complaint regarding sexual offenses” when there is a specific taint allegation
• finding nurse practitioner’s statement, including her conclusion that history was positive for child sexual abuse, admissible under Rule 803(4)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).