Legal Opinion

Breaston v. State

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided June 16, 2009No. 20S04-0810-CR-561PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SULLIVAN, Justice.

Following unrelated eriminal trials, Byron Breaston received habitual offender enhancements to his sentences. He was ordered to serve these habitual offender enhancements consecutively. - Starks v. State held that it was improper for the trial court to order consecutive habitual offender enhancements at a single criminal trial 523 N.E.2d 7385, 737 (Ind.1988). Smith v. State applied this holding to separate sentencing proceedings. 774 N.E.2d 1021, 1024 (Ind.Ct.App.2002), trams. de-mied. As such, it was incorrect to impose consecutive habitual offender enhancements in the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Smith v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2002
  2. Ingram v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2002
  3. Weaver v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1997
  4. Breaston v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2008
  5. Breaston v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 2008

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

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Todd J. Crider v. State of IndianaIndiana Supreme Court · 2013
  2. Anthony H. Dye v. State of IndianaIndiana Supreme Court · 2012
  3. Martin Meehan v. State of IndianaIndiana Supreme Court · 2014
  4. Jacob Lumbley v. State of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals · 2017
  5. Jerry W. Young v. State of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals · 2016

16 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