Skip to main content
· 3/19/2024

State v. McLawhon

Syllabus

statutory sexual offense with a child by an adult, sexual act by a substitute parent or custodian, indecent liberties with a child, plain error, testimony, pre-arrest silence, cross-examination

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that “[e]vidence qualifies as material when there is any reasonable likelihood it could have affected the judgment of the jury”
  • holding that a witness’s inconsistent statements were subject to disclosure notwithstanding government’s “argument ... that the jury could have disbelieved [the] undisclosed statements”
  • holding that, where an eyewitness’s “testimony was the only evidence linking [the defendant] to the crime,” the eyewitness’s undisclosed prior inconsistent statements “were plainly material”
  • holding that notes from the investigating investigator that the only eyewitness could not describe the perpetrator was material
  • holding that notes from the investigating investigator that the only eyewitness could not describe the perpetrator was material
  • holding that notes from the investigating investigator that the only eyewitness could not describe the perpetrator was material

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.