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.
4 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 68 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Taylor v. State.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Taylor v. State Anchor | green | “when there is a conflict between the oral pronouncement of sentence and the sentence in the written judgment, the oral pronouncement controls.” | 24 |
| 2 | Thompson v. State | green | “the solution in those cases in which the oral pronouncement and the written judgment conflict is to reform the written judgment to conform to the sentence that was orally pronounced.” | 19 |
| 3 | Taylor v. State | green | “a defendant's sentence must be pronounced orally in his presence.” | 14 |
| 4 | Taylor v. State | green | “the judgment, including the sentence assessed, is just the written declaration and embodiment of that oral pronouncement.” | 11 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.