Inquiry Concerning a Judge No. 19-101 & No. 19-175 Re: Robin C. Lemonidis

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 trial court lawfully may impose a harsher sentence on a defendant after retrial or remand” as long as the court does not do so vindictively
• concluding that the “history of the amendment confirms that general sense of the legislature’s intentions,” even though there was nothing in the legislative history that established a legislative intent
• holding that “a trial court lawfully may impose a harsher sentence on a defendant after retrial or remand” as long as the court does not do so vindictively
• considering history of amendment, including that it was adopted in response to Court of Appeals decision, as relevant background informing analysis of what legislature likely intended
• allowing increased sentence on resentencing so long as reasons appear on record and are \based on identified facts of which the first sentencing judge was unaware\
• considering history of amendment, including that it was adopted in response to Court of Appeals decision, as relevant background inform- ing analysis of what legislature likely intended

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).