Hawaii Supreme Court· 10/16/1995

State v. Baron

Citations

905 P.2d 613
80 Haw. 107
1995 Haw. LEXIS 82

How courts have described this case

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

concluding that a witness’s prior videotaped interview was admissible only after the defendant was given an opportunity to cross-examine the witness
trial court abused its discretion by not precluding the testimony of the screening prosecutor about alleged child abuse victim’s credibility
“[W]e hold that the trial court abused its discretion by not precluding the testimony of [the screening prosecutor].”
“[W]e hold that the trial court abused its discretion by not precluding the testimony of [the screening prosecutor].”
“[W]e hold that the trial court abused its discretion by not precluding the testimony of [the screening prosecutor].”
“The prejudice to Appellant is patently clear and warrants a reversal in this case. We therefore vacate the guilty verdicts and remand the case to the circuit court for a new trial.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Moon, Klein, Levinson, Nakayama, Ramil

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

17 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.