State v. Katherine Lea Stanfield

How courts have described this case

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

• “A defendant’s right to confrontation is violated when ‘an expert acts merely as a well-credentialed conduit,’ and does not provide any independent, expert opinion.” (quoting United States v. Ramos-Gonzalez, 664 F.3d 1, 5-6 (1st Cir.2011)
• “Because no position [in Williams ] received support from a majority of the justices, Williams does not provide us a governing legal principle and this Court views the decision as limited to the unique set of facts presented in that case.”
• “Because no position [in Williams] received support from a majority of the justices, Williams does not provide us a governing legal principle and this Court views the decision as limited to the unique set of facts presented in that case.”
• discussing the right to confrontation under the Sixth Amendment

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).