Supreme Court of Kansas· 10/28/2011

State v. Miller

Citations

264 P.3d 461
293 Kan. 535
2011 Kan. LEXIS 495

How courts have described this case

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

collecting cases involving statements made by a victim to a SANE nurse or other medical professional
applying the reasoning of Mendez to confrontation analysis where a SANE nurse’s medical and forensic purposes “[o]ften . . . will require examination of individual questions and responses”
applying the reasoning of Mendez to confrontation analysis where a SANE 11 nurse’s medical and forensic purposes “[o]ften . . . will require examination of 12 individual questions and responses”
collecting cases in which patient’s statements to doctor found to be nontestimonial
court “may consider whether the prosecutor’s remark is . . . made in response to defense counsel’s remarks”
while a contemporary objection is required for review of an evidentiary prosecutorial error claim, it is unnecessary to consider prosecutorial error during closing argument

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Luckert, Moritz, Duncan

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

69 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.