Hubbard 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 victim’s initial inability to name his attacker, who was an acquaintance, was not inherently incredible
• explaining that the testimony of the victim, who was the sole eyewitness, was sufficient to support defendant’s convictions
• holding testimony of the victim, the sole eyewitness, was sufficient to support convictions
• testimony of victim, who was sole eyewitness, was sufficient to support defendant’s convictions

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

10 cases in this archive cite this case.

• In Re Termination of Relationship of DD
  Indiana Court of Appeals· 2004-03-04· cited 125×
• King v. State
  Indiana Court of Appeals· 2003-11-24· cited 23×
• Williams v. State
  Indiana Supreme Court· 2000-09-22· cited 17×
• Peterson v. Marion County Office of Family & Children
  Indiana Court of Appeals· 2004-03-04· cited 7×
• Williams v. State
  Indiana Supreme Court· 2001-02-02· cited 6×
• Tony W. Heroy v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
  Indiana Court of Appeals· 2017-03-21
• Genario Garcia v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
  Indiana Court of Appeals· 2017-05-25
• Christopher Justice v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
  Indiana Court of Appeals· 2018-05-25
• Shon Hudson v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
  Indiana Court of Appeals· 2019-11-13
• Tamika Ballance v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
  Indiana Court of Appeals· 2020-12-16

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Wright v. State
  Indiana Supreme Court· 1997-12-29· cited 139×
• Tillman v. State
  Indiana Supreme Court· 1994-11-04· cited 99×
• Coleman v. State
  Indiana Supreme Court· 1998-04-24· cited 66×
• Webster v. State
  Indiana Supreme Court· 1998-08-31· cited 53×
• White v. State
  Indiana Supreme Court· 1999-03-10· cited 48×