in Re Aleyda Tijerina

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that when a trial court unqualifiedly rules on the admissibility or inadmissibility of evidence prior to trial no further objection at trial is required in order to preserve the issue for appeal
• noting that it is generally permissible for experts to testify regarding traits typically exhibited by child abusers, as such was beyond the common experience of most jurors
• holding expert testimony regarding characteristics typically exhibited by child abuse victims is admissible because this type of evidence goes beyond the common experience of most jurors, and jurors would be assisted by such expert testimony
• approving of expert testimony that child had been abused, and, in dicta, of expert testimony regarding traits typically exhibited by child abusers if offered for a relevant noncharacter purpose, but excluding expert testimony that identified defendant as the abuser
• approving of expert testimony that child had been abused, and, in dicta, of expert testimony regarding traits typically exhibited by child abusers if offered for a relevant noncharacter purpose, but excluding expert testimony that identified defendant as the abuser
• “Using evidence of a person’s characteristics in the prosecution’s case in chief simply to support the ultimate conclusion that he acted in conformance with those characteristics in committing a crime, is not permissible.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).