State v. Lichon

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a perfunctory motion in limine considered in summary fashion did not preserve the issue for appeal
• holding that jurors possessed “an absolute right” to review videotapes with assistance 4 of video equipment provided by the bailiff when tapes had been admitted into evidence
• holding that a motion in limine failed to preserve issue for appeal in part because the judge who tried the case was not the same judge who granted the motion
• distinguishing ruling under Rule 404(c) from one on motion to suppress evidence
• deliberating jury had right to review videotapes properly admitted into evidence
• stating a motion in limine will preserve an issue on appeal if “the objectionable matter is brought to the attention of the trial court in a manner sufficient to advise the trial court that the error was not waived.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).