Washington Supreme Court· 5/4/1989

State v. Jones

Citations

772 P.2d 496
112 Wash. 2d 488
1989 Wash. LEXIS 50

How courts have described this case

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

the statute’s essential purposes should not be defeated by a stubborn insistence on corroboration that is impossible to obtain
\[Child-victim] has described and demonstrated with particularity acts of sexual gratification that even the most imaginative adult might not conceive in a vacuum of personal experience.\
“[Child-victim] has described and demonstrated with particularity acts of sexual gratification that even the most imaginative adult might not conceive in a vacuum of personal experience.”
a trial court is not bound by the Rules of Evidence when it determines questions concerning the admissibility of evidence, citing ER 104(a), ER 1101(c)(1), (c)(3)
a trial court is not bound by the Rules of Evidence when it determines questions concerning the admissibility of evidence (citing ER 104(a), ER 1101(c)(1), (c)(3))
four-year-old child's descriptions of urolagnia

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Durham, Callow, Utter, Brachtenbach, Dolliver, Dore, Pearson, Andersen, Smith

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

20 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.