State of Tennessee v. Ketorrence Eugene Rollins
Syllabus
The defendant, Ketorrence Eugene Rollins, appeals his Davidson County Criminal Court jury convictions of two counts of aggravated robbery, arguing that the evidence adduced at trial was insufficient to sustain his convictions. Discerning no error, we affirm.
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding “status as an ‘ADA tester’ does not absolve [plaintiff] of the need to show an injury in fact”
- affirming dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction of ADA tester case for failure to satisfy individual injury requirement under Article III
- affirming dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction of ADA tester case for failure to satisfy individual injury requirement under Article III
- affirming dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction of ADA tester case for failure to satisfy individual injury requirement under Article III
- “Laufer’s assumed status as an ‘ADA tester’ does not absolve her of the need to show an injury in fact for standing purposes.”
- “Laufer’s assumed status as an ‘ADA tester’ does not absolve her of the need to show an injury in fact for standing purposes.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Judge James Curwood Witt, Jr.
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.