State v. Cheatam

Supreme Court of Washington · Decided 2003-12-11

Cited by 160 later decision(s) in our corpus · see the citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

From the opinion

Alexander, C. J. (concurring in dissent) — I agree with the majority that the trial court did not err in excluding expert testimony on the reliability of eyewitness identification and in determining that there was no prosecutorial misconduct when the prosecutor commented on the defense’s failure to produce a witness. I disagree, however, with its conclusion that the search of Cheatam’s shoes was constitutionally permissible un…

Read the full opinion (source) ↗


Lexace provides legal information, not legal advice, and no attorney–client relationship is created. Citation figures are counts of later citing opinions in our corpus and may be incomplete; always read and Shepardize the full opinion before relying on it.