La Fleur v. Janowitz

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that such evidence is “enough from which to infer a defendant’s participation in the crime”
• finding that such evidence is “enough from which to infer a defendant’s participation in the crime”
• concluding the “State’s 45 evidence . . . fail[ed] to meet the sufficiency threshold”
• holding evidence is not prejudicial if it is duplicative of other, properly admitted evidence
• holding evidence is not prejudicial if it is duplicative of other, properly admitted evidence
• finding that because a video and photograph showed the child’s condition “before trial and reflected the long-term effects of the injuries [he] had sustained,” they were “relevant to the issue of the victim’s serious injury”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).