Skip to main content

Cook v. State

Citations

  • 675 N.E.2d 687
  • 1996 Ind. LEXIS 182
  • 1996 WL 732338

How courts have described this case

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

  • observing that generally a continuance, rather than exclusion, is the appropriate remedy for the late disclosure of a witness
  • a continuance, rather than exclusion, is the appropriate remedy for the late disclosure of a witness
  • trial court erred in excluding Cook’s witness; although Cook failed to timely disclose the witness to the State, the State had named the witness in its own discovery materials and was aware of the substance of her testimony well in advance of trial

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Sullivan, Shepard, Dickson, Selby, Boehm

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

74 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

18 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.