Skip to main content

King v. State

Citations

  • 894 N.E.2d 265
  • 2008 Ind. App. LEXIS 2157
  • 2008 WL 4444267

How courts have described this case

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

  • observing that “an inappropriate sentence analysis does not involve an argument that the trial court abused its discretion in sentencing the defendant”
  • observing that “an inappropriate sentence analysis does not involve an argument that the trial court abused its discretion in sentencing the defendant”
  • observing that “[a]s our Supreme Court has made clear, inappropriate sentence and abuse of discretion claims are to be analyzed separately”
  • Noting that our supreme court has made clear that inappropriate sentence and abuse of discretion claims are to be analyzed separately.”
  • explaining that “inappropriate sentence and abuse of discretion claims are to be analyzed separately”
  • observing that “interspersed within King’s inappropriate sentence argument are references to the abuse of discretion standard . . . As our Supreme Court has made clear, inappropriate sentence and abuse of discretion claims are to be analyzed separately”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Vaidik, Kirsch, Crone

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

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.