State v. Gomez
Tennessee Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court 1
OPINION
2Opinion of the Court · ClarkCornelia A. Clark, J.
in which WILLIAM M. BARKER, C.J., and JANICE M. HOLDER and GARY R. WADE, JJ., joined.
This matter is before us upon remand by the United States Supreme Court for reconsideration in light of that Court’s decision in Cunningham v. California, 549 U.S. -, 127 S.Ct. 856, 166 L.Ed.2d 856 (2007). In our initial disposition of this matter, State v. Gomez, 163 S.W.3d 632 (Tenn.2005), we concluded that the Defendants were not entitled under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), and its progeny to relief as to their sentences. Upon further review following…
3Cases cited15 opinions
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- United States v. BookerSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- United States v. OlanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Ring v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by183 opinions
- State v. DorantesTennessee Supreme Court · 2011
- State of Tennessee v. Susan Renee BiseTennessee Supreme Court · 2012
- State v. CarterTennessee Supreme Court · 2008
- State v. BanksTennessee Supreme Court · 2008
- State of Tennessee v. James Allen PollardTennessee Supreme Court · 2013
178 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.