Tennessee Supreme Court· 6/1/1976

Gray v. State

Citations

538 S.W.2d 391
1976 Tenn. LEXIS 489

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 single criminal episode concept . . . is irrelevant to a determination of whether to impose consecutive sentencing”
holding that the imposition of “consecutive sentences when crimes inherently dangerous are involved should be based upon the presence of aggravating circumstances and not merely on the fact that two or more dangerous crimes were committed”
noting the absence of guidelines for determining when consecutive sentencing was appropriate and defining guidelines to be followed in the future
“reject[ing] petitioner’s argument that in determining whether to sentence a defendant to consecutive sentences, the trial judge is required to take into consideration the fact that all of the offenses arose out of one single criminal episode”
defining a professional criminal as “one who has knowingly devoted [her]self to criminal acts as a major source of livelihood or who has substantial income or resources not shown to be derived from a source other than criminal activity”
“A defendant may be classified as a dangerous offender if the crimes for which he is convicted indicate that he has little or no regard for human life, and no hesitation about committing a crime in which the risk to human life is high.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Fones, Cooper, Henry, Brock, Harbison

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

284 cases in this archive cite 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.