Colby Taylor Lee v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that statements “such as those about where the assault happened and the identity of [the] abuser” were for the primary purpose of proving past events for later use at trial
• noting that if an attorney “abandoned a nonfrivolous claim that was both ‘obvious’ and ‘clearly stronger’ than the claim[s] that [s]he 16 No. 20‐3253 actually presented, [her] performance was deficient, unless [her] choice had a strategic justification”
• distinguishing questions about sexual abuse a year earlier from questions about more recent sexual abuse
• distinguishing questions about sexual abuse a year earlier from questions about more recent sexual abuse
• distinguishing questions about sexual abuse a year earlier from questions about more recent sexual abuse

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).