State v. Weaverling

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that a defendant does not have an automatic right to introduce evidence of his character for truthfulness simply because he testifies in his defense
• holding the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of uncharged sexual misconduct where such occurred with the same victim and under similar circumstances as the charged offense
• stating the pattern of sexual abuse represented “quintessential common scheme or plan evidence”
• noting expert testimony “assists the jury in understanding some of the aspects of the behavior of victims and provides insight into the abused child’s often strange demean- or”
• stating behavioral evidence \assists the jury in understanding some of the aspects of the behavior of victims and provides insight into the sexually abused child's often strange demeanor\
• stating the pattern of sexual abuse represented “quintessential common scheme or plan evidence”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).