Shinn v. State
Court of Appeals of Mississippi
1Opinion of the Court
ROBERTS, J.,
for the Court:
¶ 1. When sentencing a felony offender for multiple convictions, it is important for our trial judges to specify in their sentencing orders whether the sentences are ordered to run concurrently or consecutively to one another. Today’s case illustrates the problems that develop when sentencing orders are entered and are silent as to whether the sentencing orders are concurrent or consecutive. The majority rule requires that silent sentencing orders which do not specify whether the sentences are ordered to run concurrently or consecutively should be construed as…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Brown v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1999
- McNeil v. HesterMississippi Supreme Court · 2000
- Corporate Management, Inc. v. Greene CountyMississippi Supreme Court · 2009
- Smith v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1999
- Temple v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1996
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Jimmy Shinn v. State of MississippiCourt of Appeals of Mississippi · 2015
- Edwards v. StateCourt of Appeals of Mississippi · 2012
- Davarrius Brown v. State of MississippiCourt of Appeals of Mississippi · 2017
- John Joseph Dedeaux, Sr. v. State of MississippiCourt of Appeals of Mississippi · 2014
- Brown v. StateCourt of Appeals of Mississippi · 2018
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.