State v. Midgett

How courts have described this case

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

• “Because the statements were made after the alleged motive to fabricate arose, they were not probative to corroborate [the] trial testimony.”
• “This hearsay exception is . . . rather narrow.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Roach
  South Dakota Supreme Court· 2012-12-26· cited 30×
• State v. Centeno
  Utah Supreme Court· 2023-10-05· cited 17×
• State v. Shelton
  South Dakota Supreme Court· 2021-04-14· cited 11×
• State of Iowa v. Timothy M. Fontenot
  Supreme Court of Iowa· 2021-04-23

Cites

13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Crawford v. Washington
  Supreme Court· 2004-03-08· cited 14,756×
• Ohio v. Roberts
  Supreme Court· 1980-06-25· cited 5,425×
• California v. Green
  Supreme Court· 1970-06-23· cited 3,363×
• United States v. Michael E. Quinto
  Second Circuit· 1978-08-07· cited 125×
• State v. Knecht
  South Dakota Supreme Court· 1997-05-14· cited 69×
• State v. Devall
  South Dakota Supreme Court· 1992-07-29· cited 31×
• State v. Thompson
  South Dakota Supreme Court· 1985-12-11· cited 31×
• State v. Moriarty
  South Dakota Supreme Court· 1993-06-02· cited 30×
• State v. Beynon
  South Dakota Supreme Court· 1992-04-29· cited 22×
• State v. Carlson
  South Dakota Supreme Court· 1986-07-30· cited 19×
• State v. Smith
  South Dakota Supreme Court· 1998-01-14· cited 17×
• State v. Thorpe
  South Dakota Supreme Court· 1968-10-25· cited 11×
• Bohlmann v. Lindquist
  South Dakota Supreme Court· 1997-04-16· cited 7×