106 Tennessee opinions name it 3 courts 1976–2025 3 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 v. Ashbygreen2 sentences2012T.C.A. § 40-35-401(d) (2010); State v. Ashby, 823 S.W.2d 166, 169 (Tenn. 1991). 2010T.C.A. § 40-35-401(d) (2006); State v. Ashby, 823 S.W.2d 166, 169 (Tenn. 1991). | 76 | 78 |
State v. Taylorgreen2 sentences2021See Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-210 ; State v. Taylor, 63 S.W.3d 400, 411 (Tenn. Crim. 2021See Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-210 ; State v. Taylor, 63 S.W.3d 400, 411 (Tenn. Crim. | 2 | 2 |
State v. Gentrygreen2 sentences1987T.C.A. §§ 40-21-104(a)(1), 40-35-303(b); State v. Gentry, 656 S.W.2d 53, 55 (Tenn.Crim.App.1983). 1987T.C.A. §§ 40-21-104(a)(1), 40-35-303(b); State v. Gentry, 656 S.W.2d 53, 55 (Tenn.Crim.App.1983). | 2 | 2 |
State of Tennessee v. Christine Caudlegreen2 sentences2013The State contends that because the record does not include a transcript of the guilty plea hearing, “the trial court’s sentencing decision should be presumed correct.” In State v. Caudle, 388 S.W.3d 273 (Tenn. 2012), our supreme court recently held that “when a record does not include a transcript of the hearing on a guilty plea, the Court of Criminal Appeals should determine on a case-by-case basis whether the record is sufficient for a meaningful review of the defendant’s sentence under the standard adopted in Bise.” Id. at 279 . 2013The State contends that because the record does not include a transcript of the guilty plea hearing, “the trial court’s sentencing decision should be presumed correct.” In State v. Caudle, 388 S.W.3d 273 (Tenn. 2012), our supreme court recently held that “when a record does not include a transcript of the hearing on a guilty plea, the Court of Criminal Appeals should determine on a case-by-case basis whether the record is sufficient for a meaningful review of the defendant’s sentence under the standard adopted in Bise.” Id. at 279 . | 1 | 2 |
Caldwell v. Mississippigreen2 sentences1998The appellants next assert that the prosecutor diminished the jury’s sense of responsibility in determining the sentence in violation of Caldwell v. Mississippi, 472 U.S. 320 , 105 S.Ct. 2633 , 86 L.Ed.2d 231 . 1998The appellants next assert that the prosecutor diminished the jury’s sense of responsibility in determining the sentence in violation of Caldwell v. Mississippi, 472 U.S. 320 , 105 S.Ct. 2633 , 86 L.Ed.2d 231 . | 1 | 2 |
State of Tennessee v. LaJuan Harbisongreen1 sentence2025Id. at *12 . however, has not pursued the double jeopardy issue at trial or on appeal, see State v. Harbison, 539 S.W.3d 149, 164 (Tenn. 2018) (explaining that double jeopardy violations are capable of being waived); Baker v. State, 417 S.W.3d 428, 439 (Tenn. 2013) (holding that post-conviction relief is not available from ineffective assistance of counsel in a criminal contempt proceeding), and the trial court did not engage with the issue when Grandmother raised it. | 1 | 1 |
Tracy Rose Baker v. State of Tennesseegreen1 sentence2025Id. at *12 . however, has not pursued the double jeopardy issue at trial or on appeal, see State v. Harbison, 539 S.W.3d 149, 164 (Tenn. 2018) (explaining that double jeopardy violations are capable of being waived); Baker v. State, 417 S.W.3d 428, 439 (Tenn. 2013) (holding that post-conviction relief is not available from ineffective assistance of counsel in a criminal contempt proceeding), and the trial court did not engage with the issue when Grandmother raised it. | 1 | 1 |
State v. McCrawgreen1 sentence2015App. 1971); see also McCraw, 551 S.W.2d at 694 (concluding that the expiration of a sentence does not bar a petitioner’s filing a post-conviction petition). | 1 | 1 |
State of Tennessee v. Susan Renee Bisegreen1 sentence2013He asserts this Court should conduct a de novo review of the sentence with no presumption of correctness because “the trial court did not sufficiently follow the Tennessee Criminal Sentencing Reform Act of 1989 so as to entitle the judgment of the trial court to a presumption of correctness.” The State responds that the court properly denied alternative sentencing and that the proper standard of review was announced in State v. Bise, 380 S.W.3d 682, 706 (Tenn. 2012), and is an abuse of discretion with a presumption of reasonableness. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Samuelsgreen1 sentence2012See State v. Samuels, 44 S.W.3d 489, 492 (Tenn. 2001). -7- Upon a challenge to the sentence imposed, this Court has a duty to conduct a de novo review of the sentence with a presumption that the determinations made by the trial court are correct. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Coopergreen1 sentence2008T.C.A. § 40-35-209(c) (2006); State v. Cooper, 977 S.W.2d 130, 132 (Tenn. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
McLaney v. Bellgreen1 sentence2008See McLaney v. Bell, 59 S.W.3d 90, 93 (Tenn. 2001). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Imfeldgreen1 sentence2006Id. §§ 40-35-103(5), -210(b); State v. Imfeld, 70 S.W.3d 698, 704 (Tenn. 2002). 1. | 1 | 1 |
Dixon v. Hollandgreen1 sentence2003See Dixon v. Holland, 70 S.W.3d 33, 37 (Tenn. 2002). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Smithgreen1 sentence2002Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 40-35-102 , -103, -210 (1997); State v. Smith, 735 S.W.2d 859, 863 (Tenn. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Melvingreen1 sentence2001See State v. Melvin, 913 S.W.2d 195, 203 (Tenn.Crim.App.1995). | 1 | 1 |
Archer v. Stategreen1 sentence2001Archer v. State, 851 S.W.2d 157, 164 (Tenn. 1993). | 1 | 1 |
Stiller v. Stategreen1 sentence1999See, e.g., Stiller v. State, 516 S.W.2d 617 (Tenn. 1974) (probation granted where defendant forged bank notes in sum of $26,000, made false banking entries and embezzled $65,740.00); State v. Grissom, 959 S.W.2d 514, 520 (Tenn. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
Marks v. Southern Trust Companygreen2 sentences1997See Marks, 203 Tenn. at 205 , 310 S.W.2d at 438 (stressing the importance of the settlor’s intent “as evidenced by all the provisions of the instrument.”). 1997See Marks, 203 Tenn. at 205 , 310 S.W.2d at 438 (stressing the importance of the settlor’s intent “as evidenced by all the provisions of the instrument.”). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Adkinsgreen1 sentence1989See State v. Adkins, 725 S.W.2d 660 (Tenn.1987); State v. Hartman, 703 S.W.2d 106 (Tenn.1985). | 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. Brewer
green
2 sentences2010State v. Brewer, 875 S.W.2d 298 (Tenn.Crim.App. 1993); State v. Ashby, Id. 2010State v. Brewer, 875 S.W.2d 298 (Tenn.Crim.App. 1993); State v. Ashby, Id. | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Blakely v. Washington
green
2 sentences2005Sentence The defendant filed a post-argument motion for sentence review in light of Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. ____ , 124 S. Ct. 2531 , 159 L. 2005Sentence The defendant filed a post-argument motion for sentence review in light of Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. ____ , 124 S. Ct. 2531 , 159 L. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
State v. Walker
green
2 sentences2001Expiration of the Sentence The test for determining whether a defendant’s sentence has expired was first established by this Court in State v. Walker, 905 S.W.2d 554 (Tenn.1995). 2001Expiration of the Sentence The test for determining whether a defendant’s sentence has expired was first established by this Court in State v. Walker, 905 S.W.2d 554 (Tenn.1995). | 1 | 2001–2001 |
State v. Middlebrooks
red
1 sentence1998The trial court found:- (1) that the Petitioner was afforded the effective assistance of counsel; (2) that no Brady violations were proven and nothing was introduced to show the alleged violations were material to his punishment; (3) that the sentence was not a violation of the Double Jeopardy clause; (4) that the claims concerning the flight instruction and appearance before a Magistrate were waived because there was no objection at trial or on direct appeal; (5) that the “heinous, atrocious or cruel” aggravating circumstance is constitutional; (6) that Tennessee’s death penalty is not cruel | 1 | 1998–1998 |
State v. Goad
green
1 sentence1996The trial court denied the request for an early adjournment, stating that it “wouldn’t allow that testimony at the sentence hearing.” Id. at 852 . | 1 | 1996–1996 |
State v. Hartman
green
1 sentence1989See State v. Adkins, 725 S.W.2d 660 (Tenn.1987); State v. Hartman, 703 S.W.2d 106 (Tenn.1985). | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Graham v. State
green
2 sentences1976In Graham v. State, 202 Tenn. 423 , 304 S.W.2d 622 (1957) and Smith v. State, 527 S.W.2d 737 (Tenn.1975), which were pre- Farris decisions, our Supreme Court held that any reference to parole possibilities during argument was improper. 1976In Graham v. State, 202 Tenn. 423 , 304 S.W.2d 622 (1957) and Smith v. State, 527 S.W.2d 737 (Tenn.1975), which were pre- Farris decisions, our Supreme Court held that any reference to parole possibilities during argument was improper. | 1 | 1976–1976 |
Smith v. State
green
1 sentence1976In Graham v. State, 202 Tenn. 423 , 304 S.W.2d 622 (1957) and Smith v. State, 527 S.W.2d 737 (Tenn.1975), which were pre- Farris decisions, our Supreme Court held that any reference to parole possibilities during argument was improper. | 1 | 1976–1976 |
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.