District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 6/5/2014
In re L.C.
Citations
- 92 A.3d 290
- 2014 WL 2515200
- 2014 D.C. App. LEXIS 165
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 availability of “corroborative evidence was irrelevant to the question of the admissibility of” expert testimony on the reliability of eyewitness identifications
- “[T]o say the trial court did not abuse its discretion is not to say the court exercised its discretion properly.”
- “[T]his court may not affirm a discretionary ruling on a ground the trial court did not rely on and had discretion to reject.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Washington, Glickman, Nebeker
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
16 cases in this archive cite this case.
- ERIC GARDNER v. UNITED STATESDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2016-06-23· cited 31×
- Troy D. Richardson v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2014-08-28· cited 21×
- Chamontae A. Walker & Corey D. Yates v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2017-08-24· cited 14×
- Travers v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2015-10-08· cited 9×
- CHARLES M. COATES v. UNITED STATESDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2015-04-23· cited 8×
- Cynthia Sanchez v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2014-11-06· cited 3×
- Keith A. Moore v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2015-04-30
- In re Andre P. BarberDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2015-10-08
- Ruffin v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2019-11-21
- Jones v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2021-11-18
- Wilson v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2022-01-06
- Machado v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2024-10-24
- Toyer v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2024-10-31
- Austin v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2025-09-25
- State of Iowa v. Pat Grant KepnerSupreme Court of Iowa· 2025-11-14
- People v. StaynerCalifornia Supreme Court· 2026-04-30
Cites
26 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Kotteakos v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1946-06-10· cited 7,845×
- Securities & Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corp.Supreme Court· 1943-02-01· cited 3,975×
- Holmes v. South CarolinaSupreme Court· 2006-05-01· cited 1,409×
- Johnson v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1979-01-31· cited 771×
- State v. HendersonSupreme Court of New Jersey· 2011-08-24· cited 487×
- Johnson v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1996-10-17· cited 210×
- Ibn-Tamas v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1979-10-15· cited 186×
- Dyas v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1977-07-25· cited 152×
- Punch v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1977-09-22· cited 128×
- Winfield v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1996-04-24· cited 116×
- Randolph v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2005-09-01· cited 68×
- Western Industries, Inc., Cross-Appellant v. Newcor Canada Limited, Cross-AppelleeSeventh Circuit· 1984-07-13· cited 64×
- Benn v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2009-09-03· cited 50×
- Turner v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1993-03-23· cited 47×
- Reavis v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1978-11-24· cited 40×
- Street v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1992-01-15· cited 40×
- Heath v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2011-07-21· cited 32×
- Hager v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2004-09-02· cited 30×
- Plummer v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2002-12-31· cited 29×
- Russell v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2011-04-14· cited 20×
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.