State of Tennessee v. James D. Wooden

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 definition of „illegal sentence‟ in Rule 36.1 is coextensive with, and not broader than, the definition of the term in the habeas corpus context”
• holding that “the definition of „illegal sentence‟ in Rule 36.1 is coextensive with, and not broader than, the definition of the term in the habeas corpus context”
• holding that “the definition of ‘illegal sentence’ in Rule 36.1 is coextensive with, and not broader than, the definition of the term in the habeas corpus context”
• holding that “the definition of ‘illegal sentence’ in Rule 36.1 is coextensive with, and not broader than, the definition of the term in the habeas corpus context”
• holding that “the definition of ‘illegal sentence’ in Rule 36.1 is coextensive with, and not broader than, the definition of the term in the habeas corpus context”
• holding that “the definition of ‘illegal sentence’ in Rule 36.1 is coextensive with, and not broader than, the definition of the term in the habeas corpus context”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).