State Ex Rel. Neely v. Sherrill
Arizona Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
*509OPINION
MOELLER, Justice.
JURISDICTION
After a mistrial in this criminal case, the defendant moved to preclude the state from using the victim’s in-court, post-hypnotic identification of defendant. The trial court granted the motion. On special action to the court of appeals, that court reversed and held the post-hypnotic identification admissible. We granted review pursuant to Rule 8(b) Ariz.R.P.Spec. Action § 8, 17B A.R.S., and have jurisdiction pursuant to Ariz. Const, art. 6, § 5(1). After oral argument, we affirmed the trial court’s order of exclusion and permitted the trial to proceed,…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Frye v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1923
- State v. HurdSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1981
- People v. ShirleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
- State Ex Rel. Collins v. SUPERIOR COURT, ETC.Arizona Supreme Court · 1982
- People v. HughesNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Logerquist v. McVeyArizona Supreme Court · 2000
- Hall v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1991
- Burral v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1999
- State v. LopezArizona Supreme Court · 1994
- State v. LopezCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1994
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.