Hayes v. Reynolds

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that our vacating a sentence imposed to run consecutively to Tanner’s other sentences had “disturbed the trial court’s overall sentencing scheme” and, thus, a remand for resentencing was required
• concluding that our vacating a sentence imposed to run consecutively to Tanner’s other sentences had “disturbed the trial court’s overall sentencing scheme” and, thus, a remand for resentencing was required
• stating that where this Court upsets the sentencing scheme envisioned by the trial court, the better practice is to remand for resentencing
• holding vacatur of a consecutive sentence in the context of a larger sentencing scheme necessitates vacatur of the entire sentence
• finding, sua sponte , that convictions for homicide while driving under the influence and driving under the influence should merge
• vacating sentences where trial court failed to merge DUI and DUI homicide offenses for sentencing purposes

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).