mitigating factor claim (Indiana) · Go Syfert
← Indiana issues

mitigating factor claim in Indiana

14 Indiana opinions name it 1 courts 1981–2018 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Indiana 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 (2)

CaseFollowedCited
Cardwell v. Stategreen
ind · 2008 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016
1 sentence

2016The principal role of appellate review is to “leaven the outliers, . . . not to achieve a perceived ‘correct’ result in each case.” Cardwell v. State, 895 N.E.2d 1219, 1225 (Ind. 2008).

11
Gurley v. Stategreen
ind · 1980 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 1981–1981
2 sentences

1981See, Gurley v. State (1980), Ind., 398 N.E.2d 1282 ; Rinard v. State (1979), Ind., 394 N.E.2d 160 (incompetent counsel not a mitigating factor to waiver of prosecutorial misconduct issue where Supreme Court found counsel to be competent).

1981See, Gurley v. State (1980), Ind., 398 N.E.2d 1282 ; Rinard v. State (1979), Ind., 394 N.E.2d 160 (incompetent counsel not a mitigating factor to waiver of prosecutorial misconduct issue where Supreme Court found counsel to be competent).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Also cited on this issue (4)

CaseCitedYears
Rogers v. State green
indctapp · 2007
2 sentences

2015Id.

2015Id.

102012–2015
Healey v. State green
indctapp · 2012
2 sentences

2016“A trial court does not err in failing to find a mitigating factor where that claim is highly disputable in nature, weight, or significance.” Id.

2016“A trial court does not err in failing to find a mitigating factor where that claim is highly disputable in nature, weight, or significance.” Healey, 969 N.E.2d at 616 . [14] Finally, as to Pearson’s claim that her twenty-year sentence is inappropriate, we may revise a sentence “if, after due consideration of the trial court’s decision, the Court finds that the sentence is inappropriate in light of the nature of the offense and the character of the offender.” Ind. Appellate Rule 7(B).

22016–2016
Tommy Orlando Townsend, Sr. v. State of Indiana green
· 2015
1 sentence

2018Id. at 830–31.

12018–2018
Rinard v. State neutral
ind · 1979
2 sentences

1981See, Gurley v. State (1980), Ind., 398 N.E.2d 1282 ; Rinard v. State (1979), Ind., 394 N.E.2d 160 (incompetent counsel not a mitigating factor to waiver of prosecutorial misconduct issue where Supreme Court found counsel to be competent).

1981See, Gurley v. State (1980), Ind., 398 N.E.2d 1282 ; Rinard v. State (1979), Ind., 394 N.E.2d 160 (incompetent counsel not a mitigating factor to waiver of prosecutorial misconduct issue where Supreme Court found counsel to be competent).

11981–1981

Where else courts name it

IN 14 (1981–2018) NC 12 (1984–2025) OH 7 (1987–2021) NY 7 (2008–2026) CA 5 (1979–2025) PA 4 (2014–2014) IL 2 (1996–2023) MA 2 (2007–2024) CT 2 (2003–2004) NJ 2 (1988–2002)

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