State v. Schackart

How courts have described this case

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

• holding “prior bad acts” that “all involved the victim” were “relevant to the victim’s state of mind” and to rebut the defense “of consent on the part of the victim”
• explaining other acts involving the victim of a charged offense are “relevant to the victim’s state of mind” and lack of consent, and therefore not excluded by Rule 404

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State Ex Rel. McDougall v. Strohson
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1997-09-04· cited 35×
• State v. Sirny
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1989-01-17· cited 11×
• State v. Green
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1992-08-11· cited 1×

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• McDougall v. North Carolina
  Supreme Court· 1983-10-03· cited 975×
• State v. Jeffers
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1983-01-24· cited 217×
• State v. Garcia
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1967-10-26· cited 19×
• State v. Robinson
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1980-10-03· cited 9×