Whisler v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• Apprendi represented procedural, not substantive change and was not a “watershed rule” of ciiminal procedure implicating fundamental fairness of trial; could not be applied in collateral attacks on sentences
• direct appeal final prior to Apprendi decision, so Ap-prendi was not retroactively applied
• direct appeal final prior to Apprendi decision, so Apprendi was not retroactively applied
• direct appeal final prior to Apprendi decision, so Apprendi was not retroactively applied
• “The court’s general rule with regard to application of an overruling decision has been stated as applying the decision ‘retroactively to all similar cases pending as of the date of the overruling decision, regardless of when the cause of action accrued.’ ”
• Apprendi not a watershed rule that can be applied retroactively

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).