Skip to main content

State v. Castaneda

Citations

  • 621 N.W.2d 435
  • 2001 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 15
  • 2001 WL 92313

How courts have described this case

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

  • stating court must first determine if evidence is relevant, if so, then court balances probative value against the danger of unfair prejudice
  • describing admissibility of hearsay when a declarant is “psychologically unavailable” to testify
  • “Obviously [the witness’s] testimony [about a sex act]—which was in the context of children—would arouse a jury’s sense of horror and would provoke its instinct to punish . . . .”
  • “If it is not relevant, then the challenged evidence must be excluded.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Lavorato, Snell, Neuman, Cady, Larson, Ternus

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

13 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.