Skip to main content

Martin v. State

Citations

  • 736 N.E.2d 1213
  • 2000 Ind. LEXIS 1239
  • 2000 WL 1563012

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that a witness’s prior inconsistent statement to an officer could be used to impeach her
  • holding that a witness's prior inconsistent statement to an officer could be used to impeach her
  • holding that a prior inconsistent statement was admissible and the defendant failed to ask for a limiting instruction that the jury could not use the statement as substantive evidence
  • holding that a prior inconsistent statement was admissible and the defendant failed to ask for a limiting instruction that the jury could not use the statement as substantive evidence
  • providing that it is well settled that the erroneous admission of evidence is harmless and does not require reversal if other evidence having the same probative value is admitted without objection or contradiction
  • distinguishing Davis by noting that there was nothing deceptive about the testimony of the witness at issue regarding his adjudications or prior encounters with law enforcement

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Sullivan, Shepard, Dickson, Boehm, Rucker

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

15 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

31 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

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.