Protests 68397-K of Armour Leather Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “evidence regard- ing whether [the witness] intended to apply for a U visa was relevant to whether she had a particular personal interest in the outcome of the case. Therefore, defendant was entitled to ask her whether she intended to apply for a U visa.”
• trial court’s exclusion of evidence not harmless, because additional admitted evidence was “qualitatively different from” the excluded evidence
• exclusion of evidence that complainant had an immigration reason for testifying against defendant was not harmless, even though there was evidence that complainant also had a financial reason for testifying against defendant

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).