West Virginia Supreme Court· 4/8/1996

State v. Broughton

Citations

470 S.E.2d 413
196 W. Va. 281
1996 W. Va. LEXIS 33

How courts have described this case

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

determining that circuit court did not abuse its discretion in admitting cash as authentic and relevant evidence where the State established that the money was located by a trained, experienced police dog thirty- five to forty feet from the point of the defendant’s apprehension
‘[s]entences imposed by the trial court, if within statutory limits and if not based on some [im]permissible factor, are not subject to appellate review’
“[s]entences imposed by the trial court, if within statutory limits and if not based on some [im]permissible factor, are not subject to appellate review”
’’[sjentences imposed by the trial court, if within statutory limits and if not based on some ([imjpermissible factor, are not subject to appellate review”); Syl. pt. 9 State v. Hays, 185 W.Va. 664, 408 S.E.2d 614 (1991
’’[sjentences imposed by the trial court, if within statutory limits and if not based on some ([imjpermissible factor, are not subject to appellate review”); Syl. pt. 9 State v. Hays, 185 W.Va. 664, 408 S.E.2d 614 (1991); Syl. pt. 4, State v. Goodnight, 169 W.Va. 366, 287 S.E.2d 504 (1982

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Workman

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

23 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.