Skip to main content

Lockhart v. State

Citations

  • 671 N.E.2d 893
  • 1996 Ind. App. LEXIS 1356
  • 1996 WL 566998

How courts have described this case

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

  • concluding that a sentence which is contrary to or violative of the penalty mandated by statute is an illegal sentence
  • holding that it is the general if not unanimous rule that a trial court has the power to vacate an illegal sentence and impose a proper one
  • upholding Lockhart’s conviction for child molesting by fondling where he touched and rubbed child’s penis and had no non-incriminating explanations for the contact
  • affirming child molesting conviction when the defendant touched the victim’s penis and rubbed it for approximately five minutes
  • evidence sufficient to establish defendant’s intent to arouse or gratify his sexual desires when he rubbed victim’s penis for approximately five minutes
  • “When the sentence imposed by the trial court is found to be improper, it is the general if not unanimous rule that the trial court has the power to vacate the illegal sentence and impose a proper one.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Sharpnack, Hoffman, Baker

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

39 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.