People v. Hauschild

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]bsent an abuse of discretion by the trial court, sentences may not be altered on review”
• holding that the 15-year enhancement provided for in the armed robbery statute was unconstitutional because the sentence was more severe than the sentence for the identical offense of armed violence based on robbery
• remanding for resentencing under statute as it existed prior to the adoption of the unconstitutional amendment
• comparing the offense of armed robbery while armed with a firearm with the offense of armed violence predicated on robbery
• no ex post facto problem where the enhancements were in effect at the time the defendant committed the offenses
• a reviewing court may not alter a defendant’s sentence absent an abuse of discretion by the trial court

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).