Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee· 1/14/2009

State v. Bowman

Citations

327 S.W.3d 69
2009 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 35
2009 WL 111663

How courts have described this case

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

concluding that admission of the hearsay statement of an unavailable witness could be impeached with hearsay under Rule 806
recognizing that, “in cases involving a single offense but alternate theories for the defendant’s committing the offense, jury unanimity problems are not implicated”
concluding that “preliminary hearing testimony was admissible under the ‘former testimony’ hearsay exception of Rule 804(b)(1) and … did not violate the defendant’s rights under the Confrontation Clause.”
concluding that the witness’s preliminary testimony was “admissible under the ‘former testimony’ hearsay exception of Rule 804(b)(1) and . . . did not violate the defendant’s rights under the Confrontation Clause”
concluding that the witness’s preliminary testimony was “admissible under the ‘former testimony’ hearsay exception of Rule 804(b)(1) and . . . did not violate the defendant’s rights under the Confrontation Clause”
concluding that the witness’s preliminary testimony was “admissible under the ‘former testimony’ hearsay exception of Rule 804(b)(1) and . . . did not violate the defendant’s rights under the Confrontation Clause”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Thomas, Witt, Ogle

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

68 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.