People v. Baisden

How courts have described this case

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

• expert testimony unnecessary for fact- finder to determine that physician’s penile penetration of victim was unethical and unacceptable for purposes of medical treatment

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

2 cases in this archive cite this case.

• People v. Dozier
  Michigan Supreme Court· 2008-09-26· cited 1×
• People v. Bayer
  Michigan Supreme Court· 2008-09-26· cited 1×

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• People v. Thangavelu
  Michigan Court of Appeals· 1980-04-01· cited 8×
• People v. Bayer
  Michigan Court of Appeals· 2008-05-15· cited 6×
• People v. Capriccioso
  Michigan Court of Appeals· 1994-09-20· cited 6×
• People v. Dozier
  Michigan Supreme Court· 2008-09-26· cited 1×

Other cases named People v. Baisden

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

• People v. Baisden
  Michigan Supreme Court· 2009-04-28