16 North Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 1979–2018 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by North Carolina 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 v. Cantygreen2 sentences2010State v. Canty, 321 N.C. 520, 523 , 364 S.E.2d 410, 413 (1988). “ [Defendant has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence the existence of mitigating factors.” State v. Norman, 151 N.C. 2010State v. Canty, 321 N.C. 520, 523 , 364 S.E.2d 410, 413 (1988). “ [Defendant has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence the existence of mitigating factors.” State v. Norman, 151 N.C. | 4 | 5 |
State v. Mabrygreen2 sentences2016In North Carolina, " '[a] trial judge is given wide latitude in determining the existence of mitigating factors, and the trial court's failure to find a mitigating factor is error only when no other reasonable inferences can be drawn from the evidence.' " State v. Bacon, 228 N.C.App. 432 , 436, 745 S.E.2d 905 , 908-09 (2013) (quoting State v. Mabry, 217 N.C.App. 465 , 471, 720 S.E.2d 697 , 702 (2011) ). 2016In North Carolina, " '[a] trial judge is given wide latitude in determining the existence of mitigating factors, and the trial court's failure to find a mitigating factor is error only when no other reasonable inferences can be drawn from the evidence.' " State v. Bacon, 228 N.C.App. 432 , 436, 745 S.E.2d 905 , 908-09 (2013) (quoting State v. Mabry, 217 N.C.App. 465 , 471, 720 S.E.2d 697 , 702 (2011) ). | 1 | 3 |
State v. Heatwolegreen2 sentences2008"The trial court has wide latitude in determining the existence of mitigating factors." Id. (citing State v. Heatwole, 333 N.C. 156 , 423 S.E.2d 735 (1992)). 2008"The trial court has wide latitude in determining the existence of mitigating factors." Id. (citing State v. Heatwole, 333 N.C. 156 , 423 S.E.2d 735 (1992)). | 1 | 3 |
State v. Thompsongreen2 sentences2014It is well established that “[t]he defendant bears the burden of proof to establish the existence of mitigating factors.” State v. Thompson, 314 N.C. 618, 625 , 336 S.E.2d 78, 82 (1985) (citation omitted). *579 [A] trial court must find a statutory mitigating factor if that factor is supported by uncontradicted, substantial, and credible evidence. 2014It is well established that “[t]he defendant bears the burden of proof to establish the existence of mitigating factors.” State v. Thompson, 314 N.C. 618, 625 , 336 S.E.2d 78, 82 (1985) (citation omitted). *579 [A] trial court must find a statutory mitigating factor if that factor is supported by uncontradicted, substantial, and credible evidence. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Normangreen2 sentences2010State v. Canty, 321 N.C. 520, 523 , 364 S.E.2d 410, 413 (1988). “ [Defendant has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence the existence of mitigating factors.” State v. Norman, 151 N.C. 2010App. 100, 105 , 564 S.E.2d 630, 634 (2002). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Ahearngreen2 sentences1992The sentencing court is accorded wide latitude in determining the existence of mitigating factors, for it “observes the demeanor of the witnesses and hears the testimony.” State v. Ahearn, 307 N.C. 584, 596 , 300 S.E.2d 689, 697 (1983). 1992The sentencing court is accorded wide latitude in determining the existence of mitigating factors, for it “observes the demeanor of the witnesses and hears the testimony.” State v. Ahearn, 307 N.C. 584, 596 , 300 S.E.2d 689, 697 (1983). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Kemp
green
2 sentences2014State v. Kemp, 153 N.C. 2007State v. Kemp, 153 N.C. | 2 | 2007–2014 |
Industrial Clearinghouse, Inc. v. Walker
green
1 sentence2018In interpreting the plain meaning of this section, defendant argues that the language " 'instead of' strongly suggests that a sentence of life with parole is simply a secondary alternative to the default sentence of life without parole." Defendant further contends that "the court's decision under the sentencing scheme is guided almost exclusively by the existence of mitigating factors" and "does not require evidence of any aggravating factors that would render a juvenile eligible for the higher sentence of life without parole." Defendant notes that mitigating factors are used by defendants onl | 1 | 2018–2018 |
State v. Norris
green
2 sentences2018In interpreting the plain meaning of this section, defendant argues that the language " 'instead of' strongly suggests that a sentence of life with parole is simply a secondary alternative to the default sentence of life without parole." Defendant further contends that "the court's decision under the sentencing scheme is guided almost exclusively by the existence of mitigating factors" and "does not require evidence of any aggravating factors that would render a juvenile eligible for the higher sentence of life without parole." Defendant notes that mitigating factors are used by defendants onl 2018In interpreting the plain meaning of this section, defendant argues that the language " 'instead of' strongly suggests that a sentence of life with parole is simply a secondary alternative to the default sentence of life without parole." Defendant further contends that "the court's decision under the sentencing scheme is guided almost exclusively by the existence of mitigating factors" and "does not require evidence of any aggravating factors that would render a juvenile eligible for the higher sentence of life without parole." Defendant notes that mitigating factors are used by defendants onl | 1 | 2018–2018 |
State v. Bacon
green
2 sentences2016In North Carolina, " '[a] trial judge is given wide latitude in determining the existence of mitigating factors, and the trial court's failure to find a mitigating factor is error only when no other reasonable inferences can be drawn from the evidence.' " State v. Bacon, 228 N.C.App. 432 , 436, 745 S.E.2d 905 , 908-09 (2013) (quoting State v. Mabry, 217 N.C.App. 465 , 471, 720 S.E.2d 697 , 702 (2011) ). 2016In North Carolina, " '[a] trial judge is given wide latitude in determining the existence of mitigating factors, and the trial court's failure to find a mitigating factor is error only when no other reasonable inferences can be drawn from the evidence.' " State v. Bacon, 228 N.C.App. 432 , 436, 745 S.E.2d 905 , 908-09 (2013) (quoting State v. Mabry, 217 N.C.App. 465 , 471, 720 S.E.2d 697 , 702 (2011) ). | 1 | 2016–2016 |
State v. Jones
green
2 sentences2016On appeal, a trial court may be reversed for failure to find a mitigating factor "only when the evidence offered in support of that factor 'is both uncontradicted and manifestly credible.' " Mabry, 217 N.C.App. at 471 , 720 S.E.2d at 702 (quoting State v. Jones, 309 N.C. 214 , 220, 306 S.E.2d 451 , 456 (1983) ). 2016On appeal, a trial court may be reversed for failure to find a mitigating factor "only when the evidence offered in support of that factor 'is both uncontradicted and manifestly credible.' " Mabry, 217 N.C.App. at 471 , 720 S.E.2d at 702 (quoting State v. Jones, 309 N.C. 214 , 220, 306 S.E.2d 451 , 456 (1983) ). | 1 | 2016–2016 |
State v. Benbow
green
2 sentences2014Id. at 546-49 , 308 S.E.2d at 652-54 . *583 In the present case, however, defendant repeatedly relied on evidence gained from her testimony at Hare’s trial and evidence obtained from Khan’s sentencing hearing in support of her arguments that the trial court should find the existence of mitigating factors: [Defendant’s Counsel:] I was in the courtroom, just like the Court was, when I heard her testify to it.... and while I was sitting there listening to her testify the lawyer part of me was saying, “Oh, my gosh, Allegra, you don’t have to be so graphic about yourself,” but she was, because she 2014Id. at 546-49 , 308 S.E.2d at 652-54 . *583 In the present case, however, defendant repeatedly relied on evidence gained from her testimony at Hare’s trial and evidence obtained from Khan’s sentencing hearing in support of her arguments that the trial court should find the existence of mitigating factors: [Defendant’s Counsel:] I was in the courtroom, just like the Court was, when I heard her testify to it.... and while I was sitting there listening to her testify the lawyer part of me was saying, “Oh, my gosh, Allegra, you don’t have to be so graphic about yourself,” but she was, because she | 1 | 2014–2014 |
State v. Keys
neutral
1 sentence2008"The trial court has wide latitude in determining the existence of mitigating factors." Id. (citing State v. Heatwole, 333 N.C. 156 , 423 S.E.2d 735 (1992)). | 1 | 2008–2008 |
State v. Williams
green
2 sentences1979We recently held in State v. Williams, 295 N.C. 655 , 249 S.E.2d 709 (1978), that the defendant in a kidnapping case had the burden to persuade the jury by a preponderance of the evidence of the existence of mitigating factors listed in the kidnapping statute, G.S. 14-39. 1979We recently held in State v. Williams, 295 N.C. 655 , 249 S.E.2d 709 (1978), that the defendant in a kidnapping case had the burden to persuade the jury by a preponderance of the evidence of the existence of mitigating factors listed in the kidnapping statute, G.S. 14-39. | 1 | 1979–1979 |
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.