Harrington 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 the delay could not be attributed to defendant even though he made the motion to continue because the reason for the motion was a conflict of the prosecutor's and stating as an additional reason the fact that the trial date had not been set when the motion to continue was made
• stating delay from defendant’s motion to continue pre-trial hearing made prior to establishment of trial date could not be charged to defendant

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Cook v. State
  Indiana Supreme Court· 2004-06-30· cited 66×
• State v. Hurst
  Indiana Supreme Court· 1997-10-30· cited 45×
• Marshall v. State
  Indiana Court of Appeals· 2001-12-13· cited 22×
• Carr v. State
  Indiana Court of Appeals· 2003-06-27· cited 7×
• State of Indiana v. John B. Larkin
  Indiana Court of Appeals· 2017-06-07· cited 4×
• Cook v. State
  Indiana Court of Appeals· 2003-12-02· cited 3×
• Dallas Dale Hoback v. State of Indiana
  Indiana Court of Appeals· 2023-12-20

Cites

3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Biggs v. State
  Indiana Court of Appeals· 1989-12-07· cited 42×
• State Ex Rel. O'Donnell v. Cass Superior Court
  Indiana Supreme Court· 1984-09-12· cited 41×
• Morrison v. State
  Indiana Supreme Court· 1990-06-05· cited 37×