Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
Supreme Court of Iowa· 10/25/1995

State v. Johnson

Citations

  • 539 N.W.2d 160
  • 1995 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 217
  • 1995 WL 628145

How courts have described this case

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

  • adopting the bright-line federal rule for timing set out in Tome v. United States, 513 U.S. 150, 115 S. Ct. 696 (1995)
  • adopting the United States Supreme Court’s interpretation of Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(1)(B) as pronounced in Tome v. United States, 513 U.S. 150, 115 (1995)
  • stating a new rule “applies to the present case, prospectively to cases pending at the time this decision is filed, and to cases in which the issue resolved herein was preserved”
  • stating a new rule “applies to the present case, prospectively to cases pending at the time this decision is filed, and to cases in which the issue resolved herein was preserved”
  • “[W]e have held the use of prior statements consistent with a witness’s testimony is appropriate to rehabilitate an impeached witness.”
  • “[A] witness’s prior consistent statement is admissible as nonhearsay to rebut a charge of recent improper motive . . . only if the statement was made before the alleged improper motive to fabricate arose.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: McGiverin, Larson, Lavorato, Neuman, Andreasen

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

13 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

16 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.