Williams v. Chotard

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining in dicta that evidence of a state of mind separated from an actus reus by three to six months is too attenuated to “illuminate [an] appellant’s state of mind at the time he” committed the actus reus
• lustful intent in indecent assault 3-6 months after charged indecent act with another victim not admissible to show lustful intent during charged indecent assault
• lustful intent in indecent assault 3-6 months after charged indecent act with another victim not admissible to show lustful intent during charged indecent assault
• Crawford, J., dissenting in part and concurring in the result in part; Sullivan, C.J., dissenting
• Crawford, J., dissenting in part and concurring in the result in part; Sullivan, C.J., dissenting

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).