Tennessee Supreme Court· 6/22/2000

Hart v. State

Citations

21 S.W.3d 901
2000 Tenn. LEXIS 356
2000 WL 799066

How courts have described this case

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

finding sufficient evidence of penetration based on the victim‟s testimony that the defendant had “pressed his penis against her vulva with his hand”
stating “So long as an indictment performs its essential constitutional and statutory purposes, a defect or omission in the language of the indictment will not render the judgment void.”
finding indictment sufficient even though charge couched in language of recently repealed statute
“[W]hether to grant the petition [for habeas corpus relief] is a question of law that we review de novo.”
“[W]hether to grant the petition [for habeas corpus relief] is a question of law that we review de novo.”
“[W]hether to grant the petition [for habeas corpus relief] is a question of law that we review de novo.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Justice Adolpho A. Birch, Jr.

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Hart v. State

247 other CourtListener records share this case name; the 50 most cited are listed.

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.