Hearne v. Diane Banks

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 factor concerning the defendant’s mental and physical health was neutral where the record reflected “nothing remarkable” regarding the defendant’s health
• holding that the factor concerning the defendant’s mental and physical health was neutral where the record reflected “nothing remarkable” regarding the defendant’s health
• holding that decisions regarding diversion are reviewed under standard of review applicable to sentencing
• recognizing that “the conditional probationary period incident to the grant of judicial diversion does not qualify as a sentence per se” but is instead a decision to either defer or impose a judgment
• asserting that “Bise, Caudle, and Pollard did not abrogate the requirements set forth in Parker and Electroplating, which are essential considerations for judicial diversion”
• asserting that “Bise, Caudle, and Pollard did not abrogate the requirements set forth in Parker and Electroplating, which are essential considerations for judicial diversion”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).