State of Tennessee v. Robert Winters
Syllabus
Robert Winters, Defendant, appeals from the dismissal of a motion filed under Rule 36.1 of the Tennessee Rules of Criminal Procedure. In the motion, he challenged his sentence for aggravated robbery, stemming from State v. Winters, 137 S.W.3d 641 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2003), perm. app. denied (Tenn. Mar. 22, 2004). After a thorough review, we determine that Defendant failed to state a colorable claim for relief, attempted to challenge a sentence that was already expired, and raised claims that were previously determined. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- before considering new issue on appeal, opposing party should have had an opportunity to dispute the facts
- before considering new issue on appeal, opposing party should have had an opportunity to dispute the facts
- same as Quality Auto Body
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Sourced 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.