JOSE ARANDA v. STATE OF FLORIDA

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that, in this circumstance, Const. art. I, § 22 provides greater rights than does the Sixth Amendment
• conducting a Gunwall 2 analysis and concluding that an independent analysis of article I, section 22 was necessary
• conducting '\In criminal prosecutions the accused shall have the right... to meet the witnesses against him face to face . . . .\ WASH. CONST, art. 1, § 22. 1 State V. Scanlan (Theresa Gail), No. 95971-4 (Gordon McCloud, J., concurring
• prosecutor arguments “‘tied only to the defendant’s presence in the courtroom and not to his actual testimony’” violated the Washington Constitution whereas questioning defendant’s credibility during cross-examination was permissible

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).