Skip to main content

Smith v. State

Citations

  • 721 N.E.2d 213
  • 1999 Ind. LEXIS 1185
  • 1999 WL 1220015

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that “[b]ecause [the witness]’s testimony was essential to the State’s case . . . we cannot conclude that this restriction on exploring [the witness]’s bias was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt”
  • holding admissible statements by a police officer to a defendant where the statements regarding others’ opinions were intended to provoke a response, even without an admonishment to the jury regarding the purpose of the statements
  • rejecting the State's argument that during an interrogation police questions and comments designed to elicit responses from the defendant constituted nonhearsay
  • “[V]iolations of the right to cross- examine are subject to harmless-error analysis.”
  • “[V]iolations of the right to cross-examine are subject to harmless-error analysis.”
  • discussing the importance of cross-examination for demonstrating a witness’s bias

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Boehm, Dickson, Sullivan, Rucker, Shepard

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

45 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

21 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.