148 Tennessee opinions name it 1 courts 1997–2026 21 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Tennessee courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State of Tennessee v. Susan Renee Bisegreen2 sentences2026See T.C.A. § 40-35-114 (2018); see also Bise, 380 S.W.3d at 699 n.33, 704; State v. Carter, 254 S.W.3d 335, 343 (Tenn. 2008). 2025See T.C.A. § 40-35-114; see also Bise, 380 S.W.3d at 699 n.33, 704; State v. Carter, 254 S.W.3d 335, 343 (Tenn. 2008). | 112 | 117 |
State v. Cartergreen2 sentences2026See T.C.A. § 40-35-114 (2018); see also Bise, 380 S.W.3d at 699 n.33, 704; State v. Carter, 254 S.W.3d 335, 343 (Tenn. 2008). 2025See T.C.A. § 40-35-114; see also Bise, 380 S.W.3d at 699 n.33, 704; State v. Carter, 254 S.W.3d 335, 343 (Tenn. 2008). | 103 | 119 |
State v. Dykesgreen1 sentence1997State v. Dykes, 803 S.W.2d 250, 258 (Tenn. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Ashby
green
2 sentences2010The Defendant further contends that the sentence imposed in his case was not warranted given the totality of the circumstances surrounding the offense and that the trial court should have considered the fact that, according to State v. Ashby, 823 S.W.2d 166 (Tenn. 1991), Tennessee has scarce prison resources. 2002While such a consideration is applicable in determining if an incarcerative sentence is ap propriate, see Tenn. Code A nn. § 4 0-35 -103 (1)(c); State v. Ashby, 823 S.W.2d 166 (Tenn. 1991), such a consideration is not listed in the statutory enhancement factors which are the only factors allowable for consideration in enhancing the length of a sentence. | 2 | 2002–2010 |
Blakely v. Washington
green
2 sentences2007The 2005 amendments arose out of a concern by the Tennessee General Assembly that the provisions of Tennessee’s Criminal Sentencing Reform Act of 1989 may violate a defendant’s constitutional Sixth Amendment right to trial by jury as contemplated by the United States Supreme Court in Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296 , 124 S.Ct. 2531 , 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004) and its progeny. 2007The 2005 amendments arose out of a concern by the Tennessee General Assembly that the provisions of Tennessee’s Criminal Sentencing Reform Act of 1989 may violate a defendant’s constitutional Sixth Amendment right to trial by jury as contemplated by the United States Supreme Court in Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296 , 124 S.Ct. 2531 , 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004) and its progeny. | 2 | 2007–2007 |
State v. Anderson
green
1 sentence2002State v. Anderson, 985 S.W.2d 9 (Tenn. Crim. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.