Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
11 Tennessee opinions name it 3 courts 1923–2015 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Board of Professional Responsibility of the Supreme Court of Tennessee v. Thomas Ewing Cowangreen1 sentence2015Maddux v. Bd. of Prof'l Responsibility, 409 S.W.3d 613, 621 (Tenn.2013) (citing Bd. of Prof'l Responsibility v. Cowan, 388 S.W.3d 264, 267 (Tenn.2012); Tenn. Sup.Ct. | 1 | 1 |
H. Owen Maddux v. Board of Professional Responsibility of the Supreme Court of Tennesseegreen1 sentence2015Maddux v. Bd. of Prof'l Responsibility, 409 S.W.3d 613, 621 (Tenn.2013) (citing Bd. of Prof'l Responsibility v. Cowan, 388 S.W.3d 264, 267 (Tenn.2012); Tenn. Sup.Ct. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Pinchakgreen1 sentence2012See State v. Pinchak, 277 S.W.3d 912 (Tenn.Crim.App.2005) (noting that “the defendant’s violation of the implied consent law ... is not a criminal offense; it is a civil offense imposing an ‘administrative penalty.’ ”). | 1 | 1 |
O'DELL v. City of Knoxvillegreen1 sentence2010Such a prosecution by a city, though often called quasi-criminal, is a civil action to recover a penalty for a violation of its law.” O'Dell v. City of Knoxville, 379 S.W.2d 756, 757-58 (Tenn. 1964). -6- construction. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Smithgreen1 sentence2005State v. Smith, 933 S.W.2d 450, 453 (Tenn.1996). | 1 | 1 |
Nichols v. Stategreen1 sentence2004See Nichols v. State, 90 S.W.3d 576, 601 (Tenn. 2002) (holding defense counsel did not perform deficiently for failing to present additional mitigation witnesses at a penalty hearing where their testimony would have been cumulative to evidence already presented at the sentencing hearing); Howard Eugene Buchanan v. State, No. M2003-01815-CCA-R3-PC, 2004 WL 1114589 , at *6 (Tenn. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Williamsgreen2 sentences2001Under prior law, a penalty hearing was held only if the State sought the death penalty. [20] Before the CD-ROM became available in June of 1999, the only available source for attorneys statewide to review the Rule 12 Reports was in the Appellate Court Clerk's Office in Nashville. [21] Cazes, 875 S.W.2d at 270-71 . [22] As the North Carolina Supreme Court noted in State v. Williams, 308 N.C. 47 , 301 S.E.2d 335, 355 (1983), "[e]ven those with extensive training in data collection and statistical evaluation and analysis are unable to agree concerning the type of statistical methodology which sho 2001Under prior law, a penalty hearing was held only if the State sought the death penalty. [20] Before the CD-ROM became available in June of 1999, the only available source for attorneys statewide to review the Rule 12 Reports was in the Appellate Court Clerk's Office in Nashville. [21] Cazes, 875 S.W.2d at 270-71 . [22] As the North Carolina Supreme Court noted in State v. Williams, 308 N.C. 47 , 301 S.E.2d 335, 355 (1983), "[e]ven those with extensive training in data collection and statistical evaluation and analysis are unable to agree concerning the type of statistical methodology which sho | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
O'Haver v. Montgomery
green
2 sentences2000In O’Haver v. Montgomery, 120 Tenn. 448 , 111 S.W. 449 (1908), the Supreme Court recognized that a proceeding to recover a penalty for a violation of a municipal ordinance has characteristics of a civil as well as a criminal action: In truth, when a violator of a municipal ordinance is arrested and brought before the municipal court, he is tried for an offense committed against the laws of the corporation; but, in the absence of apt legislation to the contrary, his punishment is in the form of the assessment of a penalty. 1959There is a clear distinction between the authority conferred by statute upon “Corporation Courts” and constitutional courts, as pointed out in O’Haver v. Montgomery, 120 Tenn. 448 , 111 S.W. 449 , 452, wherein it is held that municipal courts are authorized to assess a fine in the nature of a penalty for the violation of its ordinances. | 2 | 1959–2000 |
State v. Smith
green
1 sentence2014This court has stated that the Drug Free Zone Act “enhances the penalty for a violation of Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-417 , which contains a mens rea requirement: one must knowingly possess a controlled substance and intend to sell the substance.” State v. Smith, 48 S.W.3d 159 , 167 n.4 (Tenn. Crim. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
State v. Cazes
green
1 sentence2001Under prior law, a penalty hearing was held only if the State sought the death penalty. [20] Before the CD-ROM became available in June of 1999, the only available source for attorneys statewide to review the Rule 12 Reports was in the Appellate Court Clerk's Office in Nashville. [21] Cazes, 875 S.W.2d at 270-71 . [22] As the North Carolina Supreme Court noted in State v. Williams, 308 N.C. 47 , 301 S.E.2d 335, 355 (1983), "[e]ven those with extensive training in data collection and statistical evaluation and analysis are unable to agree concerning the type of statistical methodology which sho | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Jones v. United States
green
2 sentences1997Id. at (a)(4). 5 In Jones v. United States, 526 U.S. 227 , 243 n.6, 119 S.Ct. 1215 , 1224 n.6 (1999), the United States Supreme Court noted that its prior cases suggest the following principle: [U]nder the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment and the notice and jury trial guarantees of the Sixth Amendment, any fact (other than prior conviction) that increases the maximum penalty for a crime must be charged in an indictment, submitted to a jury, and proven beyond a reasonable doubt. 1997Id. at (a)(4). 5 In Jones v. United States, 526 U.S. 227 , 243 n.6, 119 S.Ct. 1215 , 1224 n.6 (1999), the United States Supreme Court noted that its prior cases suggest the following principle: [U]nder the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment and the notice and jury trial guarantees of the Sixth Amendment, any fact (other than prior conviction) that increases the maximum penalty for a crime must be charged in an indictment, submitted to a jury, and proven beyond a reasonable doubt. | 1 | 1997–1997 |
City of Elizabethton v. Carter County
green
1 sentence1959“In truth, the action (issuance of process and assessment of a penalty) is in its various aspects a hybrid one, partly criminal and partly civil.” O’Haver v. Montgomery, supra. It is also said in the O’Haver case: “ * * * A municipality is a government within itself, and must have the power to punish for offenses against its laws, and must be able to bring that punishment to bear and to make it effective by its own agencies that is, through its own courts and officers.” A case directly in point, and contrary to the appellant’s contention, is City of Elizabethton v. Carter County, 204 Tenn. 452 | 1 | 1959–1959 |
City of Elizabethton v. Carter County
green
1 sentence1959“In truth, the action (issuance of process and assessment of a penalty) is in its various aspects a hybrid one, partly criminal and partly civil.” O’Haver v. Montgomery, supra. It is also said in the O’Haver case: “ * * * A municipality is a government within itself, and must have the power to punish for offenses against its laws, and must be able to bring that punishment to bear and to make it effective by its own agencies that is, through its own courts and officers.” A case directly in point, and contrary to the appellant’s contention, is City of Elizabethton v. Carter County, 204 Tenn. 452 | 1 | 1959–1959 |
McDaniel v. Whitsett
green
2 sentences1923The penalty doctrine approved in McDaniel v. Whitsett, 96 Tenn., 10 , 33 S. W., 567 , is applicable only to cases of fraudulent intent. 1923The penalty doctrine approved in McDaniel v. Whitsett, 96 Tenn., 10 , 33 S. W., 567 , is applicable only to cases of fraudulent intent. | 1 | 1923–1923 |
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.