Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
Tennessee Supreme Court· 1/25/2011

State v. Dorantes

Citations

  • 331 S.W.3d 370
  • 2011 Tenn. LEXIS 8
  • 2011 WL 208306

How courts have described this case

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

  • recognizing that whether sentences are to be served concurrently or consecutively is primarily within the discretion of the trial court
  • noting that an inference of guilt can be drawn from an attempt to evade arrest
  • providing that “a criminal offense may be established exclusively by circumstantial evidence” and that the jury must decide what weight to give such evidence
  • providing that the distinction between the appropriate standard and the “reasonable hypothesis” language has “rarely made a difference”
  • holding that the constitutional guarantee of a right to trial by jury includes the “right to a complete and correct charge of the law, so that each issue of fact raised by the evidence will be submitted to the jury on proper instructions”
  • stating that a criminal conviction may be based solely on circumstantial evidence and that the prosecution need not disprove alternative theories of guilt when relying on circumstantial evidence alone

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Justice Gary R. Wade

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

2,569 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

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

Other cases named State v. Dorantes

1 other CourtListener record shares this case 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.