mitigating factor error (North Carolina) · Go Syfert
← North Carolina issues

mitigating factor error in North Carolina

12 North Carolina opinions name it 1 courts 1984–2025 1 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.

Followed or applied (5)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Normangreen
ncctapp · 2002 · cited in 4 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2009–2025
2 sentences

2011As this Court has previously explained, “ ‘[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.’ ” Id. (quoting State v. Norman, 151 N.C.

2010“Atrial 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. Norman, 151 N.C.

34
State v. Cantygreen
nc · 1988 · cited in 4 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2000–2009
2 sentences

2002The trial court’s failure to find a mitigating factor is error only when the evidence so clearly establishes the fact in issue such that “no other reasonable inferences can be drawn from the evidence.” Id. at 524 , 364 S.E.2d at 413 .

2002The trial court’s failure to find a mitigating factor is error only when the evidence so clearly establishes the fact in issue such that “no other reasonable inferences can be drawn from the evidence.” Id. at 524 , 364 S.E.2d at 413 .

24
State v. Godleygreen
ncctapp · 2000 · cited in 2 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2002–2009
2 sentences

2009"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. Godley, 140 N.C.

2002“A trial judge is given ‘wide latitude in deter *106 mining 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. Godley, 140 N.C.

22
State v. Mabrygreen
ncctapp · 2011 · cited in 2 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2013–2016
2 sentences

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) ).

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) ).

12
State v. Johnsongreen
ncctapp · 2009 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2025–2025
1 sentence

2025“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. Johnson, 196 N.C.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Also cited on this issue (8)

CaseCitedYears
State v. Jones green
· 1983
2 sentences

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) ).

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) ).

21984–2016
State v. Ferguson green
nc · 2001
2 sentences

2009App. 15, 27 , 535 S.E.2d 566, 575 (2000) (quoting State v. Canty, 321 N.C. 520, 524 , 364 S.E.2d 410, 413 (1988)), disc. review denied, 353 N.C. 387 , 547 S.E.2d 25 (2001).

2002App. 15, 27 , 535 S.E.2d 566, 575 (2000) (quoting State v. Canty, 321 N.C. 520, 524 , 364 S.E.2d 410, 413 (1988)), disc. review denied, 353 N.C. 387 , 547 S.E.2d 25 , cert. denied, 532 U.S. 964 , 149 L.

22002–2009
State v. Flippen green
nc · 2001
2 sentences

2009App. 15, 27 , 535 S.E.2d 566, 575 (2000) (quoting State v. Canty, 321 N.C. 520, 524 , 364 S.E.2d 410, 413 (1988)), disc. review denied, 353 N.C. 387 , 547 S.E.2d 25 (2001).

2002App. 15, 27 , 535 S.E.2d 566, 575 (2000) (quoting State v. Canty, 321 N.C. 520, 524 , 364 S.E.2d 410, 413 (1988)), disc. review denied, 353 N.C. 387 , 547 S.E.2d 25 , cert. denied, 532 U.S. 964 , 149 L.

22002–2009
State v. Bacon green
ncctapp · 2013
2 sentences

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) ).

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) ).

12016–2016
State v. Johnson neutral
nc · 2009
1 sentence

2011As this Court has previously explained, “ ‘[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.’ ” Id. (quoting State v. Norman, 151 N.C.

12011–2011
Pogue v. Ratelle green
scotus · 2001
1 sentence

2002App. 15, 27 , 535 S.E.2d 566, 575 (2000) (quoting State v. Canty, 321 N.C. 520, 524 , 364 S.E.2d 410, 413 (1988)), disc. review denied, 353 N.C. 387 , 547 S.E.2d 25 , cert. denied, 532 U.S. 964 , 149 L.

12002–2002
Tucker v. Mossing green
scotus · 2001
1 sentence

2002App. 15, 27 , 535 S.E.2d 566, 575 (2000) (quoting State v. Canty, 321 N.C. 520, 524 , 364 S.E.2d 410, 413 (1988)), disc. review denied, 353 N.C. 387 , 547 S.E.2d 25 , cert. denied, 532 U.S. 964 , 149 L.

12002–2002
State v. Winnex green
ncctapp · 1984
2 sentences

1984D Defendant Carter contends that the court erred in failing to find as a mitigating factor that he was only a passive participant in these crimes. “[A] trial judge’s failure to find a mitigating factor will be error where the evidence is (1) substantial or uncontradicted and (2) inherently credible.” State v. Winnex, 66 N.C.

1984App. 280 , 311 S.E. 2d 594 (1984).

11984–1984

Statutes the citing opinions construe

NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1340.16 (10) NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1444 (3)

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.

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