Gural 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 completion of a sentence renders a case moot unless the defendant can establish a right lost by reason of the conviction
• holding that completion of a sentence renders a case moot unless the defendant can establish a right lost by reason of the conviction
• adopting and applying the “collateral consequences” rule: “the satisfaction of the sentence renders the case moot unless, in consequence of the conviction or sentence, the defendant suffers collateral legal disabilities”
• see, e.g., Steck v. State, 2015 WL 2357161, at (Del. 2015); Anderson v. State, 2014 WL 7010017, at (Del. 2014); Keita v. State, 2010 WL 4970743, at -2 (Del. 2010)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).