Cundiff v. Crider

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that George is overruled to the extent it was based upon standard disapproved in Toomer, supra
• noting that George is overruled to the extent it was based upon standard disapproved in Toomer, supra
• finding that trial court was authorized to believe trial counsel’s testimony that defendant never reported that jury saw him wearing shackles in court, thereby prejudicing him, and its resolution of that issue was not clearly erroneous
• finding that trial court was authorized to believe trial counsel’s testimony that defendant never reported that jury saw him wearing shackles in court, thereby prejudicing him, and its resolution of that issue was not clearly erroneous
• oral stipulation by counsel that was entered into the record in a pretrial hearing obviated necessity of proof of prior burglary conviction
• “it is well settled that a trial court may propound a clarifying question in order to develop the truth of a case without violating this statute”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).