Supreme Court of Kansas· 8/19/2009

State v. Houston

Citations

213 P.3d 728
289 Kan. 252
2009 Kan. LEXIS 846

How courts have described this case

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

holding that when a court denies a motion in limine seeking to exclude evidence at trial, the moving party must still object to the introduction of evidence at trial in order to preserve challenge to its admission for appeal
“In the alternative, counsel should have asked for a continuing objection and thereby eliminated the need for the later trial objection.”
exclusion of evidence of victim’s prior violence toward defendant’s family members not error because not relevant to self-defense theory
“The appellate courts will not consider those parts of a Rule 6.09 letter that fail to comply with the rule.”
“[Rule 6.09] was not intended to be, nor should it be, used as yet another briefing opportunity.”
“[Rule 6.09] was not intended to be, nor should it be, used as yet another briefing opportunity.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Nuss

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

48 cases in this archive cite 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.