Skip to main content

Hatchett v. State

Citations

  • 552 S.W.2d 414
  • 1977 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 241

How courts have described this case

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

  • concluding that because the question concerning the defendant’s prior drug use was not proper for impeachment purposes under Rule 608(b
  • holding that questions concerning witness’s drug use as impeachment were improper via Tenn. R. Evid. 608(b)
  • stating that “[t]he state cannot ask a witness an irrelevant but prejudicial question and then, under a theory of impeachment, predicate a second irrelevant and prejudicial question upon the defendant’s response”
  • “The State cannot ask a witness an irrelevant but prejudicial question, and then, under the theory of impeachment, predicate a second irrelevant and prejudicial question upon the defendant’s response to the first question.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Russell, Tatum, Walker

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

17 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.