Skip to main content

Milligan v. State

Citations

  • 761 A.2d 6
  • 2000 WL 1201849

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that instruction was defective because it listed “a litany of possibilities that included purposes totally unrelated to [the trial judge's] careful, particularized findings purporting to justify admission”
  • holding that evidence of a later sexual encounter that triggered the delayed report was admissible \only after Milligan had in fact introduced evidence of `late reporting'\ to impeach the victim's testimony
  • holding that evidence of a later sexual encounter that triggered the delayed report was admissible “only after Milligan had in fact introduced evidence of 'late reporting' ” to impeach the victim’s testimony
  • holding that use of the phrase \another proper purpose” was improper because \it encouraged consideration, without guidance, of any purpose contemplated by 404(b) or as the jury might presume to find proper”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Veasey, Walsh, Holland, Hartnett, Steele

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.