Hansen v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that admission of statements of non-testifying co-defendants or accomplices was highly prejudicial to defendant because of lack of opportunity for cross-examination
• holding that the Court must decide each case by the facts shown in the record, not assertions in the brief
• holding that trial court's determination of whether demonstrative evidence is \appropriate and relevant\ will be upheld, unless abuse of discretion occurs and is \prejudicial to the accused\
• holding denial of preliminary hearing not reversible error unless defendant was prejudiced by such denial
• noting the trial court did allow the counselor “substantial liberties in testifying about Hansen’s past”
• affirming denial of defense instruction cautioning jurors against giving undue credence to the testimony of law enforcement officials

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).