Tennessee Supreme Court· 2/28/2006

State v. Ivy

Citations

188 S.W.3d 132
2006 Tenn. LEXIS 137
2006 WL 463935

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 petitioner was not prejudiced in penalty phase of capital case when the prior indictment charging first degree murder was introduced but the defendant was convicted of second degree murder
noting that Rule 804(b)(6) does not require formal charges
the rule “does not limit a declarant’s statements to past events or prior offenses the declarant would have testified about” (emphases in original)
the rule \does not limit a declarant's statements to past events or prior offenses the declarant would have testified about\ (emphases in original)
first quoting U.S. Const. amend. VI; then citing Tenn. Const. art. I, § 9; and then citing Tenn. Code Ann. § - 14 - 40-13-202
“Since the jury is presumed to follow jury instructions absent evidence to the contrary, we conclude that these instructions protected against the possibility of prejudice.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Justice E. Riley Anderson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

69 cases in this archive are cited by 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.