State v. Livingston
Tennessee Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
CHARLES H. O’BRIEN, Special Justice and BIRCH, Justice.
We accepted the application for review filed pursuant to Rule 11, Tenn.RA.pp. P., in these four cases in order to determine whether the fresh-complaint doctrine recently modified in State v. Kendricks 1 applies in cases wherein a child is the victim of abuse. For the reasons below appearing, we hold that the fresh-complaint doctrine does not apply in such cases.
As a related issue, one of the cases under submission (Livingston) presents an opportunity for us to clarify' the circumstances under which statements made by a child victim…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- United States v. Harvey M. RenvilleCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1985
- Commonwealth v. AmiraultMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1989
- State v. MeeksCourt of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee · 1993
- People v. BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
- Woods v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1954
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by37 opinions
- Ruff v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 1998
- State of Tennessee v. Hubert Glenn SextonTennessee Supreme Court · 2012
- State v. InlowCourt of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee · 2001
- State v. SchallerCourt of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee · 1997
- State of Tennessee v. Glen HowardTennessee Supreme Court · 2016
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.