Court of Appeals of Iowa· 9/9/2004

State v. Cooley

Citations

691 N.W.2d 737
2004 Iowa App. LEXIS 1043
2004 WL 2005998

How courts have described this case

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

holding “a defendant’s presence is not required where a district court is correcting an existing sentence, so long as the disposition would not be aided by the defendant’s presence and the modification does not make the sentence more onerous”
requiring a judgment be set aside on remand and noting the remand was not limited to resentencing
mandating personal presence at a hearing for “correction of sentence” if the proceeding is aided by the defendant’s presence and if the new sentence will be more onerous
noting court’s remand direction in effect “required that the district court set aside its judgment that [defendant] was a habitual offender” and “did not limit the remand to a simple reduction in the sentence”
“[A] defendant’s presence is not required where a [trial] court is correcting an existing sentence, so long as the disposition would not be aided by the defendant’s presence and the modification does not make the sentence more onerous.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Sackett, Vogel, Zimmer

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

12 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

17 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.