State v. Justin Jamal Warner
Syllabus
The Court addresses two issues in this appeal from Justin Jamal Warner's conviction for murder and other crimes. We hold the warrant issued by the county magistrate was not invalid simply because it sought information stored in another state, and we hold the post-crime showing of a crime-scene video to Warner's probation officer and the officer's subsequent identification of Warner as the man in the video did not require a hearing under Neil v. Biggers because the officer was not an eyewitness to the crime.
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that “if the causation question involves questions of medical science or technology, the jury requires the assistance of expert testimony”
- when “the causation question involves questions of medical science or technology, the jury requires the assistance of expert testimony”
- “if the causation question involves questions of medical science or technology, the jury requires the assistance of expert testimony”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
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.