Kendal 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 the charge survived a general demurrer even though the offense level was mislabeled in the indictment, particularly given the statute and underlying facts were never changed
• “Whether the scars rose to the level of serious disfigurement was a factual issue for the jury to resolve.”
• “the trial court’s slip of the tongue [in instructing the jury] cannot be said to have misled or confused the jury”
• “evidence of a witness’s first offender status is admissible to ‘reveal a possible bias, prejudice or ulterior motive on the part of the witness to give untruthful or shaded testimony in an effort to please the State.’”
• “evidence of a witness’s first offender status is admissible to ‘reveal a possible bias, prejudice, or ulterior motive on the part of the witness to give untruthful or shaded testimony in an effort to please the State’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).