State v. Wicker

How courts have described this case

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

• an error is harmless if the reviewing court can conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that any reasonable jury would have reached the same result if the error had not occurred
• error not harmless where fingerprints were the sole basis of the State’s case and the jury received two opinions, one admitted in error
• business record cannot be used to prove conclusion on which “[n]ot all experts would necessarily agree”
• under the business records exception, an expert witness may testify only to acts, conditions or events, not to entries in the form of opinions or causal state ments
• testimony that identification was verified by another senior technician, as “demonstrated by the presence of her initials on the fingerprint card,” amounted to a statement that “the two sets of prints match” and was “classic hearsay”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).