Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee· 4/7/1999

State v. Russell

Citations

10 S.W.3d 270
1999 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 321

How courts have described this case

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

holding that in a misdemeanor evading arrest case the trial court was not required to make explicit findings regarding enhancement and mitigating factors
sentencing court required to make detailed findings on record in felony cases but not in misdemeanor cases
“If the defendant wished to demonstrate prejudice, he could have done so by submitting an affidavit of the [supposed] material witness in support of the motion for continuance or presenting the witness’s testimony at the hearing on the motion for new trial”
“If the defendant wished to demonstrate prejudice, he could have done so by submitting an affidavit of the [supposed] material witness in support of the motion for continuance or presenting the witness’s testimony at the hearing on the motion for new trial”
“When this court has been faced with a transcript of the sentencing hearing clearly indicating the trial court's intention that the defendant's percentage is not zero percent . . . we have deferred to the trial court's express pronouncement as reflected in the transcript.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Witt, Hayes, Smith

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

20 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.