Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee· 11/20/1986

State v. Ford

Citations

725 S.W.2d 689
1986 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 2856

How courts have described this case

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

holding that the trial court’s error in requiring the defendant to enter a stipulation was harmless
holding that the trial court erred in requiring the defendant to present a witness’s testimony through stipulation when the defendant objected to the presentation of the testimony through stipulation and the prosecutor objected to the wording of the stipulation
holding that the vehicle in motion is not required
stating that “[s]tipulations are favored and should be encouraged and enforced by the courts, . . . [but] it is not the duty or function of a trial court to require one of the parties to the litigation to stipulate with his adversary.”
stating that “[s]tipulations 8 are favored and should be encouraged and enforced by the courts, . . . [but] it is not the duty or function of a trial court to require one of the parties to the litigation to stipulate with his adversary.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Scott, Duncan, Daughtrey

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

7 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.