Erickson v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that restitution may be ordered only in relation to an offense that a defendant has admitted, upon which he has been convicted, or for which he has agreed to pay restitution
• holding that restitution may be ordered only in relation to an offense that a defendant has admitted, upon which he has been convicted, or for which he has agreed to pay restitution
• defendant may be ordered to pay. restitution for offense he or she has admitted, to which he or she has been found guilty, or upon which he or she has agreed to pay restitution
• defendant could not be required to pay restitution for losses suffered by victims of offenses that the state dismissed as part of a plea bargain or had never charged to defendant

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Stachowski
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 2014-11-20· cited 23×
• Buffington v. State
  Nevada Supreme Court· 1994-02-04· cited 21×
• Igbinovia v. State
  Nevada Supreme Court· 1995-05-25· cited 17×
• State v. Blanchard
  Montana Supreme Court· 1995-02-14· cited 16×
• State v. Lozano
  New Mexico Court of Appeals· 1996-06-10· cited 14×
• Roe v. State
  Nevada Supreme Court· 1996-05-30· cited 8×
• Greenwood v. State
  Nevada Supreme Court· 1996-04-30· cited 1×
• Coleman (Krystal) Vs. State
  Nevada Supreme Court· 2019-12-19

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. French
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1990-05-01· cited 27×
• Nelson v. State
  Alaska Supreme Court· 1981-05-22· cited 24×
• State v. Madril
  New Mexico Court of Appeals· 1987-01-15· cited 17×
• State v. Berman
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 1987-12-23· cited 11×
• State v. Voetberg
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1989-10-25· cited 6×