Hape 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 a party may not invite error and then later argue the error supports reversal, because error invited by the complaining party is not reversible error
• holding that trial court did not abuse its discretion in recognizing danger posed to community during car chase as aggravating circumstance in sentencing for offense of resisting law enforcement
• holding that the amount of methamphetamine, the packaging of the drugs in multiple bags, coupled with an officer’s testimony, was sufficient to prove Hape’s intent to deliver the methamphetamine.
• stating that a party may not raise an argument for the first time on appeal
• noting that a defendant may not raise an argument for the first time on appeal
• holding trial court did not abuse its discretion in failing to credit defendant’s substance abuse as a significant mitigating circumstance

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).