Pineta v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that there is no analytical difference between negligent driving and reckless driving for purposes of determining whether these offenses should merge into the offense of manslaughter by automobile, which requires proof that the defendant acted with gross negligence
• “The relevant inquiry is whether the two offenses are of necessity closely intertwined or whether one offense is necessarily the overt act of the other.” (Emphasis in original) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)
• objection sustained to questions on re-cross that “exceeded the scope of redirect”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).