Williamsen v. People

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “[t]he salutary purposes of informal traffic infraction hearings would be frustrated if [issue preclusion] were to be applied so as to limit a full and fair consideration of the issue in a criminal trial”
• based on subsection (6)(f), the trial court’s ruling which allowed a reasonable time between the denial of a defendant’s motion to dismiss and the rescheduled trial date was not disturbed on review
• “Questions of the probative value and possible prejudicial impact of evidence are addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court, and the trial judge’s rulings will not be disturbed absent a clear abuse of discretion.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).