Commonwealth v. Timbers, C.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that impeachment evidence can be adequate to entitle a defendant to relief under the Cress test
• stating that when a witness is “prepared to admit on the stand that a prior accusation of a similar nature was false, it is hard to imagine good reason for excluding the evidence”
• ordering \the trial court [on remand to] carefully consider the newly discovered evidence in light of the evidence presented at trial \
• ordering “the trial court [on remand to] carefully consider the newly discovered evidence in light of the evidence presented at trial”
• ordering “the trial court [on remand to] carefully consider the newly discovered evidence in light of the evidence presented at trial”
• applying Cress to the defendant’s 1 Decisions published before November 1, 1990, are not binding on this Court. See MCR 7.215(J)(1). Those decisions, however, are entitled to deference and should not be casually disregarded. See People v Bensch, 328 Mich App 1, 2 n 6; 935 NW2d 382 (2019

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).