Legal Opinion · Concurrence

King v. State

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided June 6, 2002No. 33A04-0112-CR-539Published

1ConcurrenceNajam, Judge

I concur in result and write separately to express my disagreement with the standard of review applied by the majority. While our supreme court has sometimes described the standard of review for sentences to be whether the sentence "is clearly, plainly, and obviously" unreasonable, Spears v. State, 735 N.E.2d 1161, 1168 (Ind.2000), that formulation subverts Indiana Appellate Rule 7(B). The "clearly, plainly, and obviously" unreasonable test reinstates the standard of review our supreme court abandoned when it amended former Indiana Appellate Rule 17(B) in 1997.

Our authority to review and…

2Cases cited36 opinions

  1. Buchanan v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 2002
  2. Carter v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1999
  3. Spears v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 2000
  4. McCann v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 2001
  5. Tobar v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 2000

31 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