Skip to main content

State v. Arnold

Citations

  • 824 S.W.2d 176
  • 1991 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 811

How courts have described this case

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

  • concluding that the Coffee County Circuit Court could not require consecutive sentencing “in futuro” relative to judgments of conviction not yet entered in Lincoln County
  • stating that the last sentencing court has the responsibility of determining whether a sentence should be served consecutively

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Birch, Tipton, Wade

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

12 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

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.