Skip to main content

Bennett v. State

Citations

  • 787 N.E.2d 938
  • 2003 Ind. App. LEXIS 762
  • 2003 WL 21019546

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that the trial court properly did not find that the defendant’s employment was a significant mitigating circumstance where defendant did not present a specific work history, performance reviews, or attendance records
  • holding that the defendant’s alcoholism could properly have been considered an aggravating circumstance
  • holding that the defendant's alcoholism could properly have been considered an aggravating circumstance
  • holding that defendant’s alcoholism could properly have been considered aggravating circumstance
  • holding alcohol abuse may be considered aggravating circumstance when the defendant is aware of the problem but does not seek to remedy it
  • observing that even if the trial court erred in considering either of the two challenged aggravating circumstances, the trial court could still enhance the defendant‟s sentence through the single aggravating circumstance of his criminal history

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Robb, Friedlander, Vaidik

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

28 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

23 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.