State v. Champagne

How courts have described this case

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

• noting defendant “implied during cross-examination that [victim’s] testimony may have been coached” and finding no abuse of discretion in allowing testimony that forensic examiner observed no indications of coaching

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

11 cases in this archive cite this case.

• People v. Heredia-Cobos
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 2017-10-19· cited 89×
• State v. Aker
  Montana Supreme Court· 2013-09-05· cited 61×
• Craig Sampson v. State of Indiana
  Indiana Supreme Court· 2015-07-30· cited 36×
• State v. J. Rodriguez
  Montana Supreme Court· 2021-03-16· cited 14×
• State v. Anderson
  Montana Supreme Court· 2019-08-13· cited 5×
• State v. T. Morales
  Montana Supreme Court· 2020-07-28· cited 4×
• State v. Winter
  Montana Supreme Court· 2014-09-02· cited 3×
• State v. Robert Whitehead
  Montana Supreme Court· 2013-08-27
• State v. McGrath
  Montana Supreme Court· 2015-07-28
• State v. Stanley J. Maday, Jr.
  Wisconsin Supreme Court· 2017-04-05
• State v. Arvidson
  Montana Supreme Court· 2025-09-09

Cites

9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. HEAFNER
  Montana Supreme Court· 2010-04-27· cited 60×
• State v. Shreves
  Montana Supreme Court· 2002-12-20· cited 53×
• State v. Freshment
  Montana Supreme Court· 2002-03-28· cited 49×
• State v. Jay
  Montana Supreme Court· 2013-03-26· cited 29×
• State v. Coby McOmber
  Montana Supreme Court· 2007-12-17· cited 27×
• State v. Upshaw
  Montana Supreme Court· 2006-12-21· cited 26×
• State v. Frasure
  Montana Supreme Court· 2004-11-04· cited 19×
• State v. Morris
  Montana Supreme Court· 2010-12-14· cited 9×
• State v. Henderson
  Montana Supreme Court· 2005-12-20· cited 8×