Quisenberry v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that trial court abused its discretion in revoking based in part on the defendant who “constantly recognized his obligation to pay restitution”
• “If the evidence shows that the defendant is deliberately underemployed, the second factor, ‘earning ability,’ will favor revocation. . . .”
• “If a defendant . . . has the ability to borrow money but unreasonably fails to employ that option, then the third factor will weigh in favor of revocation when [the appellant] fails to pay.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).