People v. Bloomingburg

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 provision violates neither the proportionate penalties clause nor the prohibition against double enhancement
• holding that the provision violates neither the proportionate penalties clause nor the prohibition against double enhancement
• collecting cases and explaining that application of the identical elements test requires the comparison of two distinct offenses
• it is the manner of death, that it occurred as a result of a discharge of a firearm, rather than the fact of death, that is the focus of the enhancing provision
• counsel presented theory of self-defense which was unavailable because the defendant was the aggressor and did not face imminent danger of great bodily harm or death
• counsel presented theory of self-defense which was unavailable because the defendant was the aggressor and did not face imminent danger of great bodily harm or death

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).