Mattingly v. Commonwealth

How courts have described this case

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

• when the prosecutor twice misstated the test for insanity, viz: “The test is can she discriminate between right and wrong .... The question is whether or not she had the ability to discern right from wrong,” the error, properly preserved by contemporaneous objections, was not harmless

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Caudill v. Commonwealth
  Kentucky Supreme Court· 2003-06-12· cited 98×
• Matheney v. Commonwealth
  Kentucky Supreme Court· 2006-04-04· cited 67×
• Purcell v. Commonwealth
  Kentucky Supreme Court· 2004-11-18· cited 50×
• Welborn v. Commonwealth
  Kentucky Supreme Court· 2005-03-17· cited 34×
• Little v. Commonwealth
  Kentucky Supreme Court· 2009-01-22· cited 16×
• Logston v. Commonwealth
  Court of Appeals of Kentucky· 1998-01-23· cited 2×

Cites

10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Miller v. California
  Supreme Court· 1973-10-09· cited 3,038×
• New York v. Ferber
  Supreme Court· 1982-07-02· cited 2,505×
• Osborne v. Ohio
  Supreme Court· 1990-06-04· cited 897×
• United States v. Thirty-Seven (37) Photographs
  Supreme Court· 1971-06-14· cited 690×
• Payne v. Commonwealth
  Kentucky Supreme Court· 1981-10-13· cited 131×
• Edwards v. Commonwealth
  Kentucky Supreme Court· 1977-07-29· cited 39×
• Commonwealth v. Ashcraft
  Court of Appeals of Kentucky· 1985-04-05· cited 22×
• Corbett v. Commonwealth
  Kentucky Supreme Court· 1986-09-05· cited 17×
• Hall v. Commonwealth Ex Rel. Schroering
  Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976)· 1974-01-18· cited 8×
• City of Pineville v. Farrow
  Court of Appeals of Kentucky· 1954-11-19· cited 1×