Legal Opinion
State v. Contreras
Court of Appeals of Alaska
Decided December 16, 1983No. 6266, 6408PublishedCited by 32 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SINGLETON, Judge.
These consolidated cases present a single question: whether the complaining witness to a crime, who prior to trial has been hypnotized to refresh her recollection, is incompetent to testify at trial to a subsequent eyewitness identification of her assailant. We hold that hypnotism prior to trial does not per se render such a witness incompetent. See A.R.E. 601.
I. PROCEEDINGS IN TRIAL COURT
A. CONTRERAS
Joseph Contreras was indicted for five felonies: kidnapping, former AS 11.41.-300(a)(1)(C); assault in the third degree, AS 11.41.220;1 and three counts of sexual assault…
2Cases cited51 opinions
- Neil v. BiggersSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- United States v. AgursSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Stovall v. DennoSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Ohio v. RobertsSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Manson v. BrathwaiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by32 opinions
- Vivian Sprynczynatyk and Paul Sprynczynatyk, Appellees/cross-Appellants v. General Motors Corporation, Appellant/cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1985
- Thorne v. Department of Public SafetyAlaska Supreme Court · 1989
- Contreras v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1986
- Young v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 2016
- Harmon v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 1995
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.