sentence imposed violates standard (Rhode Island) · Go Syfert
← Rhode Island issues

sentence imposed violates standard in Rhode Island

15 Rhode Island opinions name it 2 courts 1999–2014 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Rhode Island 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.

Followed or applied (7)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Cotegreen
ri · 1999 · cited in 7 Rhode Island opinions naming this issue, 2000–2011
2 sentences

2011“It is the defendant’s burden to show that the sentence imposed violates this standard.” Chase, 9 A.3d at 1254 (quoting State v. Cote, 736 A.2d 93, 94 (R.I.1999) (mem.)).

2010“It is the defendant’s burden to show that the sentence imposed violates this standard.” State v. Cote, 736 A.2d 93, 94 (R.I.1999) (mem.).

67
State v. D. ORTEGAgreen
ri · 2000 · cited in 6 Rhode Island opinions naming this issue, 2000–2011
2 sentences

2011“It is the defendant’s burden to show that the sentence imposed violates this standard.” Coleman, 984 A.2d at 654 (quoting State v. Ortega, 755 A.2d 841, 841 (R.I.2000) (mem.)).

2011“It is the defendant’s burden to show that the sentence imposed violates this standard.” Coleman, 984 A.2d at 654 (quoting State v. Ortega, 755 A.2d 841, 841 (R.I.2000) (mem.)).

26
State v. Snellgreen
ri · 2011 · cited in 2 Rhode Island opinions naming this issue, 2011–2011
2 sentences

2011The defendant bears the burden “to show that the sentence imposed violates this standard.” Snell, 11 A.3d at 101 (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Coleman, 984 A.2d at 654 ; Mendoza, 958 A.2d at 1161 .

2011“It is the defendant’s burden to show that the sentence imposed violates this standard.” State v. Snell, 11 A.3d 97, 101 (R.I.2011) (quoting Coleman, 984 A.2d at 654 ).

22
State v. Colemangreen
ri · 2009 · cited in 4 Rhode Island opinions naming this issue, 2011–2011
2 sentences

2011“It is the defendant’s burden to show that the sentence imposed violates this standard.” Coleman, 984 A.2d at 654 (quoting State v. Ortega, 755 A.2d 841, 841 (R.I.2000) (mem.)).

2011“It is the defendant’s burden to show that the sentence imposed violates this standard.” Coleman, 984 A.2d at 654 (quoting State v. Ortega, 755 A.2d 841, 841 (R.I.2000) (mem.)).

14
State v. Ballardgreen
ri · 1997 · cited in 3 Rhode Island opinions naming this issue, 1999–2009
2 sentences

2009“It is the defendant’s burden to show that the sentence imposed violates this standard.” Id. (quoting State v. Cote, 736 A.2d 93, 94 (R.I.1999)).

2004To support his argument, defendant cites this Court’s decision in State v. Ballard, 699 A.2d 14 (R.I.1997), for the proposition that concurrent sentences, rather than consecutive, should be the general rule in sentencing.

13
Curtis v. Stategreen
ri · 2010 · cited in 1 Rhode Island opinions naming this issue, 2011–2011
1 sentence

2011As a result, “our review of a motion justice’s ruling on a motion to correct pursuant to Rule 35 is limited.” State v. Goncalves, 941 A.2d 842, 847 (R.I.2008); see also Snell, 11 A.3d at 101 ; Ruffner, 5 A.3d at 867 ; Curtis v. State, 996 A.2d 601, 603-04 (R.I.2010).

11
State v. Goncalvesgreen
ri · 2008 · cited in 1 Rhode Island opinions naming this issue, 2011–2011
1 sentence

2011As a result, “our review of a motion justice’s ruling on a motion to correct pursuant to Rule 35 is limited.” State v. Goncalves, 941 A.2d 842, 847 (R.I.2008); see also Snell, 11 A.3d at 101 ; Ruffner, 5 A.3d at 867 ; Curtis v. State, 996 A.2d 601, 603-04 (R.I.2010).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Rhode Island. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (6)

CaseCitedYears
State v. Chase green
ri · 2010
2 sentences

2014“It is the defendant’s burden to show that the sentence imposed violates this standard.” Id. (quoting Chase, 9 A.3d at 1254 ).

2011“It is the defendant’s burden to show that the sentence imposed violates this standard.” Chase, 9 A.3d at 1254 (quoting State v. Cote, 736 A.2d 93, 94 (R.I.1999) (mem.)).

22011–2014
State v. Mollicone green
ri · 2000
2 sentences

2005"It is the defendant's burden to show that the sentence imposed violates this standard." Id. (quoting Mollicone, 746 A.2d at 137 ). * * * However, even if defendant could prove that the sentences were disproportionate, and we reject the assertion that he has done so, he still must "meet his burden of showing that no justification existed for the sentence he ultimately received." State v. Cote, 736 A.2d 93 , 94 (R.I. 1999) (mem.).

2003“It is the defendant’s burden to show that the sentence imposed violates this standard.” Id. (quoting Mollicone, 746 A.2d at 137 ).

22003–2005
State v. Dyer green
ri · 2011
1 sentence

2014“It is the defendant’s burden to show that the sentence imposed violates this standard.” Id. (quoting Chase, 9 A.3d at 1254 ).

12014–2014
State v. Mendoza green
ri · 2008
1 sentence

2011The defendant bears the burden “to show that the sentence imposed violates this standard.” Snell, 11 A.3d at 101 (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Coleman, 984 A.2d at 654 ; Mendoza, 958 A.2d at 1161 .

12011–2011
State v. Ruffner green
ri · 2010
1 sentence

2011As a result, “our review of a motion justice’s ruling on a motion to correct pursuant to Rule 35 is limited.” State v. Goncalves, 941 A.2d 842, 847 (R.I.2008); see also Snell, 11 A.3d at 101 ; Ruffner, 5 A.3d at 867 ; Curtis v. State, 996 A.2d 601, 603-04 (R.I.2010).

12011–2011
State v. Ferrara green
ri · 2003
2 sentences

2004Id. *1287 “We only will interfere with that discretion ‘in rare instances when’ ” the sentence imposed is one “ ‘without justification and is grossly disparate from other sentences generally imposed for similar offenses.’ ” Id. “ ‘It is the defendant’s burden to show that the sentence imposed violates this standard.’ ” III Discussion The defendant first argues that the trial justice’s decision to run his various sentences consecutively was without justification.

2004Id. *1287 “We only will interfere with that discretion ‘in rare instances when’ ” the sentence imposed is one “ ‘without justification and is grossly disparate from other sentences generally imposed for similar offenses.’ ” Id. “ ‘It is the defendant’s burden to show that the sentence imposed violates this standard.’ ” III Discussion The defendant first argues that the trial justice’s decision to run his various sentences consecutively was without justification.

12004–2004

Where else courts name it

RI 15 (1999–2014) FL 2 (1981–1981) MI 2 (1994–1994)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check