Tennessee Supreme Court· 9/6/1988

State v. Preston

Citations

759 S.W.2d 647
1988 Tenn. LEXIS 171

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 certified question of law reserved by the defendant must be stated “so as to clearly identify the scope and the limits of the legal issue reserved”
requiring that the issue be stated in such a way as “to clearly identify the scope and limits of the legal issue reserved.”
requiring that the issue be stated in such a way as “to clearly identify the scope and limits of the legal issue reserved.”
stating that it is the defendant‟s burden to ensure that the appellate record contains all of the proceedings below that are relevant to whether the certified question is dispositive and the merits of the question certified
holding requirements of Rule 37(b)(2)(I) or (iv) are mandatory and jurisdictional.
concluding “the reasons relied upon by defendant in the trial court at the suppression hearing must be identified in the statement of the certified question of law and review by the appellate courts will -6- be limited to those [issues] passed upon by the trial judge”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Fones, Harbison, Cooper, Drowota, O'Brien

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named State v. Preston

102 other CourtListener records share this case name; the 50 most cited are listed.

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.