Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State v. Willey

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided May 1, 2012No. 2010-578Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partLynn, J.

I agree with the majority opinion that the defendant’s conviction should be upheld. I would also uphold the sentence imposed, however, because I believe the trial court sustainably exercised its discretion in considering the defendant’s post-offense conduct and testimony at trial, as they are reasonably related to the purposes of sentencing. Therefore, I respectfully dissent as to the portion of the opinion vacating the sentence and remanding for resentencing.

The majority relies on three factors in asserting that a remand for resentencing is required: (1) the majority’s inability to conclude…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Gall v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  2. Baker v. CarrSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  3. Bordenkircher v. HayesSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  4. Estelle v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  5. United States v. DunniganSupreme Court of the United States · 1993

21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API