State v. Lopez

How courts have described this case

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

• missing witnesses were transients who left town and could not be located
• upholding a court's refusal to give a missing witness instruction by concluding that the State satisfactorily explained that the witnesses did not appear after agreeing to testify at trial and the State could not locate them
• upholding a court’s refusal to give a missing witness instruction by concluding that the State satisfactorily explained that the witnesses did not appear after agreeing to testify at trial and the State could not locate them
• police officer’s testimony of what interpreter asserted Lopez told him was inadmissible hearsay
• absent evidence of trustworthiness, interpreted statements inadmissible

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Blair
  Washington Supreme Court· 1991-09-19· cited 140×
• State v. Reed
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 2012-06-04· cited 75×
• Correa v. Superior Court
  California Supreme Court· 2002-02-25· cited 71×
• State v. Morales
  Washington Supreme Court· 2012-01-26· cited 38×
• State v. Huynh
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 1987-08-31· cited 32×
• Clem v. State
  Nevada Supreme Court· 1988-08-25· cited 28×
• State v. Davis
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 2003-03-10· cited 19×
• State v. Garcia-Trujillo
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 1997-12-18· cited 9×
• Alcazar v. Hill
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2004-10-06· cited 1×

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. Davis
  Washington Supreme Court· 1968-03-06· cited 162×
• State v. Gosby
  Washington Supreme Court· 1975-08-28· cited 153×
• State v. Martin
  Washington Supreme Court· 1968-04-25· cited 141×
• State v. Fong Loon
  Idaho Supreme Court· 1916-06-15· cited 61×
• State v. Letterman
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1980-08-25· cited 19×
• State v. Clinton
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 1980-02-19· cited 16×