People v. Nikhman

How courts have described this case

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

• “we interpret a statute to give effect to all language, so as to render no portion meaningless or superfluous”
• in giving meaning to ambiguous statutory provisions, “we interpret a statute to give effect to all language, so as to render no portion meaningless or superfluous”
• courts should “interpret a statute to give effect to all language, so as to render no portion meaningless or superfluous”
• classification of defendant’s conviction as a class A felony or class B felony “is determined by the statute in effect at the time of his offense”
• terms of a statute should not be interpreted to render them meaningless or superfluous
• \[T]he subsequent reclassification ofan offense from a class Bto a class Afelony has no effect on a prior conviction for that offense and does not retroactively convert the conviction to a class A felony.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).