Cunningham v. State

For his participation in two separate armed robberies defendant was sentenced to two ten-year sentences, to run consecutively. He contends the imposition of these consecutive ten-year sentences constitutes an abuse of trial court discretion.

This court reviews sentences imposed by the trial court “only with the utmost reluctance.” The stated reason for such reluctance to review is that “. . . the trial court has the advantage in considering all relevant factors, including the opportunity to observe the defendant.” Where review of sentences imposed is sought and secured, we have made clear that…