Supreme Court of Kansas· 3/3/1989
State v. Eaton
Citations
- 769 P.2d 1157
- 244 Kan. 370
- 1989 Kan. LEXIS 45
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- court applies Ohio v. Roberts two-part test to consider whether state properly used closed circuit television testimony of child sexual abuse victim
- court applies Ohio v. Roberts two-part test to consider whether state properly used closed circuit television testimony of child sexual abuse victim
- hearsay statements admissible if it is established by clear and convincing evidence that to require the child to testify in open court will so traumatize the child as to prevent him from reasonably communicating to the jury
- hearsay statements admissible if it is established by clear and convincing evidence that to require the child to testify in open court will so traumatize the child as to prevent him from reasonably communicating to the jury
- An exception to the right to confrontation exists where the trial court makes an individualized finding that requiring a child to testify will so traumatize the child as to prevent the child from reasonably communicating to the jury.
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Allegrucci
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
18 cases in this archive cite this case.
- State v. AltgilbersNew Mexico Court of Appeals· 1989-12-07· cited 96×
- People v. DiefenderferSupreme Court of Colorado· 1989-12-04· cited 81×
- People v. CintronNew York Court of Appeals· 1990-01-11· cited 52×
- Craig v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 1989-07-24· cited 37×
- State v. WhiteSupreme Court of Kansas· 1990-01-19· cited 36×
- State v. BoydSupreme Court of Kansas· 2006-02-10· cited 31×
- State v. CrowSupreme Court of Kansas· 1999-01-29· cited 27×
- State v. ChisholmSupreme Court of Kansas· 1989-07-14· cited 17×
- State v. WickliffeCourt of Appeals of Kansas· 1992-01-17· cited 12×
- State v. RupertSupreme Court of Kansas· 1990-12-07· cited 12×
- State v. LackeySupreme Court of Kansas· 2005-09-30· cited 5×
- State v. HallCourt of Appeals of Kansas· 2025-02-14· cited 4×
- State v. AlbertCourt of Appeals of Kansas· 1989-08-25· cited 2×
- In Re the Treatment of AlbrightCourt of Appeals of Kansas· 1992-06-12· cited 2×
- State v. McClanahanCourt of Appeals of Kansas· 1990-05-18· cited 2×
- State v. LambCourt of Appeals of Kansas· 1990-09-14· cited 1×
- In re M.O.Court of Appeals of Kansas· 1989-03-31· cited 1×
- State v. CorrellCourt of Appeals of Kansas· 1998-12-31· cited 1×
Cites
27 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court· 1967-03-27· cited 23,069×
- Chambers v. MississippiSupreme Court· 1973-02-21· cited 5,756×
- Ohio v. RobertsSupreme Court· 1980-06-25· cited 5,425×
- California v. GreenSupreme Court· 1970-06-23· cited 3,363×
- Bourjaily v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1987-06-23· cited 2,639×
- Fahy v. ConnecticutSupreme Court· 1963-12-02· cited 1,743×
- Coy v. IowaSupreme Court· 1988-06-29· cited 1,295×
- State v. RobinsonArizona Supreme Court· 1987-04-07· cited 253×
- In Re the Adoption of Baby Boy L.Supreme Court of Kansas· 1982-04-03· cited 160×
- State v. FikeSupreme Court of Kansas· 1988-06-14· cited 100×
- State v. VincentArizona Supreme Court· 1989-01-19· cited 81×
- State v. GunzelmanSupreme Court of Kansas· 1972-11-04· cited 78×
- Wildermuth v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 1987-09-10· cited 69×
- State v. MyattSupreme Court of Kansas· 1985-04-05· cited 67×
- State v. HartSupreme Court of Kansas· 1967-12-09· cited 60×
- State v. MarksSupreme Court of Kansas· 1979-12-01· cited 57×
- Board of Greenwood County Comm'rs v. NadelSupreme Court of Kansas· 1980-11-01· cited 45×
- Herbert v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1981-04-01· cited 45×
- Flax v. Kansas Turnpike AuthoritySupreme Court of Kansas· 1979-06-09· cited 44×
- State v. KuoneSupreme Court of Kansas· 1988-06-03· cited 31×
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.