Murray v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• \The fact that the jury specifically requested that Knuckles' testimony be re-read after several hours of deliberation indicates the crucial nature of the testimony.\
• \The fact that the jury specifically requested that Knuckles' testimony be re-read after several hours of deliberation indicates the crucial nature of the testimony.\
• circuit court, through in-chambers remarks inadvertently given to jury, “offered its own explanation for” a witness’ “differing stories and hesitation”
• the rule “that it is improper for one witness to comment on the credibility of another witness’s testimony … should apply even more forcefully to judges”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

1 case in this archive cites this case.

• Dean v. Israel
  E.D. Wisconsin· 1981-06-04· cited 4×

Cites

3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Mentek v. State
  Wisconsin Supreme Court· 1976-03-02· cited 77×
• Turner v. State
  Wisconsin Supreme Court· 1977-02-15· cited 66×
• Jameson v. State
  Wisconsin Supreme Court· 1976-11-03· cited 5×