Skip to main content

Green v. State

Citations

  • 856 N.E.2d 703
  • 2006 Ind. LEXIS 1022
  • 2006 WL 3307360

How courts have described this case

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

  • recognizing that the trial court “had the ability to observe the defendant directly and listen to the tenor of his voice,” and therefore “was in the best position to determine the sincerity of his alleged remorseful statements”
  • holding that where a trial court has not entered a formal judgment of conviction on a count on which the defendant was found guilty, it is not problematic for double jeopardy purposes to merely merge that count with another at sentencing
  • explaining that a merged offense for which a defendant is found guilty but on which there is neither a judgment or sentence is unproblematic as far as double jeopardy is concerned
  • noting that “a defendant's constitutional rights are violated when a court enters judgment twice for the same offense, but not when a defendant is simply found guilty of a particular count”
  • explaining that “a merged offense for which a defendant is found guilty, but on which there is neither a judgment nor a sentence, is ‘unproblematic’ as far as double jeopardy is concerned”
  • explaining that “a merged offense for which a defendant is found guilty, but on which there is neither a judgment nor a sentence, is ‘unproblematic’ as far as double jeopardy is concerned”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Boehm, Dickson, Rucker, Shepard, Sullivan

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.