Coole v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “no clearly established law decided by the Supreme 18 Court” requires “the same jury to determine guilt and punishment”
• finding admissible a statement made to a government informant if it otherwise satisfies Rule 801(d)(2)(E)
• “Our precedent clearly establishes that to preserve a hearsay objection to the admission of a co-conspirator’s statement, the objection must be renewed at the close of all of the evidence.”
• the court need not accept as true “allegations that are 17 merely conclusory, unwarranted deductions of fact, or unreasonable inferences”
• “Our precedent clearly establishes that to preserve a hearsay objection to the admission of a co-conspirator’s statement, the objection must be renewed at the close of all of the evidence.”
• “[S]o long as the plaintiff alleges facts to support a theory that is not 23 facially implausible, the court’s skepticism is best reserved for later stages of the proceedings 24 where the plaintiff’s cases can be rejected on evidentiary grounds.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).