State v. Wiggins

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that “closing argument may be employed to demonstrate the problems that might arise as a result of cross-racial identification”
• stating that \closing argument may be employed to demonstrate the problems that might arise as a result of cross-racial identification\
• jury was properly charged with a general instruction on eyewitness identification and defendant was not entitled to an additional instruction on cross-racial identification issues
• jury was properly charged with a general instruction on eyewitness identification and defendant was not entitled to an additional instruction on cross-racial identification issues
• “Although cross-racial identification jury instructions may not be required, cross-examination and closing argument may be employed to demonstrate the problems that might arise as a result of cross-racial identification.”
• “Although cross-racial identification jury instructions may not be required, cross-examination and closing argument may be employed to demonstrate the problems that might arise as a result of cross-racial identification”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Smith v. State
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 2005-08-12· cited 32×
• State v. Allen
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 2011-05-09· cited 24×
• Smith v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2004-09-15· cited 7×

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• United States v. Melvin Telfaire
  D.C. Circuit· 1972-06-19· cited 477×
• Connecticut v. Porter
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1997-05-20· cited 268×
• State v. Cromedy
  Supreme Court of New Jersey· 1999-04-14· cited 92×
• State v. McClendon
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1999-05-11· cited 52×
• State v. Cerilli
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1992-06-04· cited 44×
• State v. Portee
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 1999-11-02· cited 18×
• Lenoir v. State
  Court of Appeals of Arkansas· 2002-05-01· cited 8×
• Miller v. State
  Indiana Court of Appeals· 2001-12-17· cited 3×