Legal Opinion

Seay v. State

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided January 15, 1997No. 82A01-9604-PC-139PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

NAJAM, Judge.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

In this case, we are asked to consider the constitutional role of the jury in an habitual offender proceeding. Gary T. Seay appeals from the trial court’s denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. In 1987, following a jury trial, Seay was convicted of Dealing in a Schedule II Controlled Substance, as a Class B felony, and of Dealing in Cocaine, as a Class B felony. He was also found to be an Habitual Offender. The trial court sentenced Seay to 20 years imprisonment for each of the convictions and enhanced Seay’s sentence for dealing in cocaine…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Weatherford v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1993
  3. Price v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1993
  4. Spranger v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1995
  5. Clark v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1990

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Seay v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1998
  2. McBride v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2003
  3. Smith v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2004
  4. Kwame Riddle v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)Indiana Court of Appeals · 2017
  5. Rodney Tyms-Bey v. State of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals · 2017

1 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