Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee· 3/19/1998

State v. Ball

Citations

973 S.W.2d 288
1998 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 329
1998 WL 459367

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 fact that the defendants arrived and left the scene at the same time was insufficient to establish that the defendant was criminally responsible for the conduct of his co- defendant
holding that “[t]his court may not return to the midpoint of the trial and then order the trial court to direct a judgment of acquittal upon the basis of the record as it then existed.”
holding that “[t]his court may not return to the midpoint of the trial and then order the trial court to direct a judgment of acquittal upon the basis of the record as it then existed.” (citing State v. 549 S.W.2d 943, 945 (Tenn. 1977))
holding that “[t]his court may not return to the midpoint of the trial and then order the trial court to direct a judgment of acquittal upon the basis of the record as it then existed.” (citing State v. 549 S.W.2d 943, 945 (Tenn. 1977))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Wade, Barker, Witt

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

322 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

27 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.