Dixon v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• contents of a 911 call were non- testimonial because exchange therein “was necessary to resolve a present emergency . . . [and] that was true even of the operator’s effort to establish the identity of the assailant”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Wheeler v. State
  Supreme Court of Delaware· 2012-02-07· cited 9×
• Pressey v. State
  Supreme Court of Delaware· 2011-08-02· cited 2×
• Carter v. State
  Supreme Court of Delaware· 2014-11-12
• State v. Carter
  Superior Court of Delaware· 2017-01-18
• State v. Clark
  Superior Court of Delaware· 2017-02-13
• State v. Tunnell
  Superior Court of Delaware· 2020-08-18
• State v. Holmes
  Superior Court of Delaware· 2022-09-20
• State v. DeAngelis
  Superior Court of Delaware· 2024-04-05

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Crawford v. Washington
  Supreme Court· 2004-03-08· cited 14,756×
• Davis v. Washington
  Supreme Court· 2006-06-19· cited 4,179×
• United States v. Inadi
  Supreme Court· 1986-03-10· cited 682×
• Culp v. State
  Supreme Court of Delaware· 2001-02-21· cited 33×
• Gannon v. State
  Supreme Court of Delaware· 1998-01-07· cited 25×
• Warren v. State
  Supreme Court of Delaware· 2001-05-14· cited 23×