How cited: Sargent v. State · Go Syfert

Sargent v. State (2007)

green · 58 citation events across 2 courts. Showing the 38 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 2011 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
201120182026
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App. · 2 citations in this opinion
Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007).
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App. · 2 citations in this opinion
Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007).
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App. · 2 citations in this opinion
Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007).
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App. · 2 citations in this opinion
Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007).
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App. · 2 citations in this opinion
Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007). 3 I.C. § 35-46-1-4. 5 To convict Ford of Battery as charged, the State was required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Ford, being at least eighteen years of age, knowingly touched J.L., who was then younger then fourteen years of age, in a rude, insolent or angry manner, which resulted in serious bodily harm to J.L., namely, a substantial risk of death by subdural hematoma.
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App. · 2 citations in this opinion
Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007).
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App.
As such, we cannot say the trial court abused its discretion in identifying this as an aggravating factor. [11] Even assuming that the impact on the victims was improperly used as an aggravating factor, however, remand for resentencing would only be appropriate “if we cannot say with confidence that the trial court would have imposed the same sentence had it properly considered reasons that enjoy Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-591 | November 16, 201…
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App.
Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 12A02-1703-CR-440 | August 17, 2017 Page 4 of 7 [13] Here, Macy was charged with Dissemination of Matter Harmful to Minors and Distribution or Exhibition of Obscene Matter.
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App.
Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007). [11] To convict Hoots of Public Intoxication, as charged, the State was required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Hoots was in a public place or place of public resort in a state of intoxication caused by Hoots’s use of a controlled substance, namely, methamphetamine, and that Hoot’s conduct was harassing, annoying, or alarming to Ridley.
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 71A05-1611-CR-2674 | March 21, 2017 Page 4 of 7 Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007). [15] The State charged Martin with Burglary, as a Level 5 felony.
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App.
Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007). [31] Here, to convict Asher as charged, the State was required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Asher knowingly carried a handgun in a vehicle or on his Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A02-1606-CR-1311 | January 13, 2017 Page 12 of 14 person, without being licensed as required by law, within 500 feet of a school.
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App.
Oster v. State, 992 N.E.2d 871, 875 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013), trans. denied. “‘If a reasonable trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty based on the probative evidence and reasonable inferences drawn therefrom, then a conviction will be affirmed.’” Holloway v. State, 51 N.E.3d 376, 378 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016) (quoting Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007)), trans. denied. [10] In order to convict Cole of battery resulting in bodily injury, a Class A …
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App.
Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007). [12] Rachell was charged with Criminal Trespass under Indiana Code section 35-43- 2-2(b)(1).
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App.
Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007).
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App.
Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007).
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App.
Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007). [13] Larson was convicted of two counts of Child Molesting, as Level 1 felonies.
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App.
Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (citations omitted).
citations omitted
green Holloway v. State (2016)
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App.
Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind.Ct.App.2007) (citations omitted).
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App.
Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007).
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App.
Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007). [11] To convict Goodnight of Attempted Robbery, as a Class B felony, the State was required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Goodnight attempted to commit the offense of Robbery, as a Class B felony, by engaging in conduct that constituted a substantial step toward the commission of that crime.
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App.
Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 769 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009).
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App.
“A victim’s testimony, even if uncorroborated, is ordinarily sufficient to sustain a conviction for child molesting.” Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007).
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App.
Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007).
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App.
Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007).
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App.
Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007).
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App.
Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007).
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App.
Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007).
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App.
Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 769 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007).
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App.
Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007).
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App.
Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007).
Rule Authority · Ind. Ct. App.
Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007).
Quote Authority · Ind. Ct. App. · signal: see
See Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 770 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (“If the defendant fails to advance a mitigating circumstance at sentencing, this court will presume that the circumstance is not significant and the defendant is precluded from advancing it as a mitigating circumstance for the first time on appeal.”).
“If the defendant fails to advance a mitigating circumstance at sentencing, this court will presume that the circumstance is not significant and the defendant is precluded from advancing it as a mitigating circumstance for the first time on appeal.”
green In Re Dw (2011)
Rule Authority · D.C.
We therefore cannot agree with the suggestion in footnote 6 to the dissent that the decision of Maryland's highest court in Tapscott somehow undercuts Lusby or is "notabl[e]" in relation to the issue of evidentiary sufficiency now before us. [12] See also Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind.Ct.App.2007) ("The State presented sufficient evidence to establish that Sargent committed [two counts of incest].
Cited (see also) · Ind. Ct. App. · signal: see, e.g.
See, e.g., Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 769 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (“If the factors are not supported by the record . . . then remand for resentencing may be the appropriate remedy if we cannot say with confidence that the trial court would have imposed the same sentence had it properly considered reasons that enjoy support in the record.”).
Cited (see also) · Ind. Ct. App. · signal: see, e.g.
See, e.g., Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 769 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (“If the factors are not supported by the record . . . then remand for resentencing may be the appropriate remedy if we cannot say with confidence that the trial court would have imposed the same sentence had it properly considered reasons that enjoy support in the record.”).
Cited · Ind. Ct. App. · signal: see
See Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007).
Cited · Ind. Ct. App. · signal: see
See Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007).
green In re D.W. (2011)
Cited (see also) · D.C. · signal: see also
See also Sargent v. State, 875 N.E.2d 762, 767 (Ind.Ct.App.2007) ("The State presented sufficient evidence to establish that Sargent committed [two counts of incest], T.S. and Sargent both testified that T.S. was Sargent’s daughter.”); State v. Sockbeson, 430 A.2d 1105, 1106 (Me.1981) (”[T]he child’s statement that the defendant was her father and the defendant’s admission that she was his daughter were sufficient to prove their relationship and sustain a conviction of inces…