Washington Supreme Court· 4/5/2007

State v. Kirkman

Citations

155 P.3d 125

How courts have described this case

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

concluding a police officer did not give opinion testimony when relating a child sex abuse victim’s interview comments about telling the truth because the officer “‘merely provided the necessary context’” to let the jury assess credibility
defining “manifest” as a showing of actual prejudice (citing State v. Walsh, 143 Wn.2d 1, 8, 17 P.3d 591 (2001); McFarland, 127 Wn.2d at 333-34)
affirming our “right of jury trial[ ] ‘is no mere procedural formality, but a fundamental reservation of power in our constitutional structure’ ” (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting State v. Evans, 154 Wn.2d 438, 445, 114 P.3d 627 (2005))
description of interview protocol of asking child to tell the truth and eliciting promise to do so is not improper vouching
description of interview protocol of asking child to tell the truth and eliciting promise to do so is not improper vouching
RAP 2.5(a)(3) analysis required where error affecting right to trial by impartial jury was raised for first time on appeal

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: J.M. Johnson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

45 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.