State v. Alberico

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the abuse of discretion standard does not prevent an appellate court from conducting a meaningful analysis
• recognizing that a jury does not have to accept an expert’s opinion as conclusive even though opinion may be uneontroverted
• recognizing that “an 10 expert’s opinion is not conclusive of a fact in issue even though the opinion may be 11 uncontroverted
• recognizing that “an 7 expert’s opinion is not conclusive of a fact in issue even though the opinion may be 8 uncontroverted
• holding that an expert may 16 not testify that the victim’s symptoms “were in fact caused by sexual abuse”
• holding that an expert may 5 not testify that the victim’s symptoms “were in fact caused by sexual abuse”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).