Day v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the factfinder could deduce that the victim was under 16 years of age “by its observation of her childlike demeanor and prepubescent body in the videotaped interview”
• holding that the factfinder could deduce that the victim was under 16 years of age “by its observation of her childlike demeanor and prepubescent body in the videotaped interview”
• jury viewed a video of the 7 victim taken two days after the child molestation at issue occurred and was authorized to deduce, based on victim’s appearance and mannerisms, that victim was under the age of 16

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• DELONG v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 2011-07-06· cited 26×
• Henderson v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 2013-03-20· cited 14×
• Charles Ralph Henderson v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 2013-03-20
• Robert Anthony Cunningham v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 2022-10-21

Cites

7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Jackson v. Virginia
  Supreme Court· 1979-10-01· cited 79,490×
• Short v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 1998-10-05· cited 469×
• Phagan v. State
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 1997-07-16· cited 75×
• Abernathy v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 2006-03-30· cited 40×
• Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Bean
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 1934-03-26· cited 27×
• Hospital Authority v. Smith
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 1977-04-06· cited 13×
• Usher v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 2008-04-02· cited 5×