232 results for 'cat:"Murder" AND cat:"Sentencing"'.
J. Meehan finds that defendant is entitled to resentencing on attempted murder, assault and other charges due to changes to the Determinate Sentencing Law that limit trial court discretion to impose an upper term. Resentencing is required unless the upper term remains valid under federal and state law and the trial court would have imposed the upper term sentences under the new law. Vacated in part.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Meehan, Filed On: June 26, 2023, Case #: F083577, Categories: Jury, murder, sentencing
J. Oden Johnson finds that the lower court properly convicted defendant of murder but improperly sentenced him to 50 years in prison. The evidence was sufficient to convict defendant, but the court did not ask defendant whether he wished to waive his right to appear in person at his sentencing hearing held via Zoom conference. Affirmed.
Court: Illinois Appellate Court, Judge: Oden Johnson, Filed On: June 23, 2023, Case #: 210754, Categories: murder, sentencing
J. Larsen finds the lower court properly dismissed the inmate's habeas claim without reaching the merits. Even if he was to prevail on his claim that his murder conspiracy conviction no longer qualifies as a predicate crime of violence for sentencing purposes, he would still be serving two life sentences for other, unchallenged convictions and, therefore, is not arguing for the right to be released, as required under the habeas statute. Affirmed.
Court: 6th Circuit, Judge: Larsen, Filed On: June 23, 2023, Case #: 21-1781, Categories: Habeas, murder, sentencing
J. Wall finds a lower court properly dismissed a defendant's second motion to correct an alleged illegal sentence. The defendant, who is serving a life sentence with no chance of parole, argued that the lower court erred in imposing restitution to the sister of his murder victim. However, the defendant is barred from bringing his claims under res judicata. Affirmed.
Court: Kansas Supreme Court, Judge: Wall, Filed On: June 23, 2023, Case #: 125,113, Categories: murder, sentencing, Restitution
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Chaisson finds that defendant was properly convicted of attempted second degree murder, possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, and obstruction of justice. The 70-year enhanced sentence for the attempted second degree murder conviction was properly imposed based on the violent nature of the crime. The evidence shows that defendant shot the victim multiple times, and the bullets hit the victim's lungs, liver, kidney, bladder and heart, rendering the victim paralyzed. However, the 40-year sentence resulting from the obstruction of justice conviction should be vacated because, under statute, the penalty should not be imprisonment for more than 20 years. Affirmed in part.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Chaisson, Filed On: June 21, 2023, Case #: 22-KA-562, Categories: murder, sentencing, Obstruction
J. Maxa remands a sentencing dispute regarding defendant's claims that he was improperly sentenced for his murder conviction. Defendant claims that the lower court did not consider his youth during resentencing, which the lower court was not legally required to consider. The matter is remanded, however, to strike a DNA collection fee and community custody supervision fees that were a part of the sentence. Affirmed in part.
Court: Washington Court Of Appeals, Judge: Maxa, Filed On: June 13, 2023, Case #: 56984-1-II, Categories: murder, sentencing
J. Bunn, in response to the Monongalia County Circuit Court’s certified question as to whether a jury’s failure to unanimously decide the recommendation of mercy allows the court to impose the life sentence required for all first-degree murder convictions, answers “No.” The court holds in keeping with trial phase in a first-degree murder case a jury must reach a unanimous verdict and if it can’t, the court must declare a mistrial and empanel a new jury to determine mercy.
Court: West Virginia Supreme Court Of Appeals, Judge: Bunn, Filed On: June 12, 2023, Case #: 21-0554, Categories: Jury, murder, sentencing
Per curiam, the appellate division finds that the trial court improperly convicted defendant of second-degree murder and weapons charges because eyewitness testimony was properly admitted, and defendant failed to preserve arguments to limit jury instructions. However, sentences should run concurrently since the charges arose from the same crimes. Reversed in part.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: June 9, 2023, Case #: KA 18-02110, Categories: murder, sentencing, Jury Instructions
J. Gibbons finds the trial court erroneously granted the inmate's motion for compassionate release. Even if an error in his jury instructions during his trial on murder-for-hire charges rendered his sentence erroneous, he cannot use that error, in conjunction with his serious health issues, as an end run around the proper avenue for his postconviction claim. Therefore, because he had already filed a habeas petition and been denied relief, the sentencing error cannot serve as the type of extraordinary and compelling reason for his early release. Reversed.
Court: 6th Circuit, Judge: Gibbons, Filed On: June 9, 2023, Case #: 22-2037, Categories: Habeas, murder, sentencing
J. Olson finds that the lower court improperly denied defendant’s post-sentence motion to review his sentencing in his murder trial. The trial court must conduct an evidentiary hearing and determine whether or not a juror discussing the case with her father inserted outside influence into the outcome of defendant’s trial. Vacated.
Court: Pennsylvania Superior Court, Judge: Olson, Filed On: June 7, 2023, Case #: J-A22008-22, Categories: Jury, murder, sentencing
J. Hendon finds defendant should be given the opportunity to file timely post-conviction motions challenging his 30-year prison sentence meted out after he allegedly violated his probation by committing attempted premeditated murder and possessing a firearm as a felon, in addition to failing to complete community service hours and other violations. Because defendant's claim that the trial court erred under Florida law by not making written findings about whether he was a danger to the community qualifying him as a violent felony offender of special concern was not preserved for appellate review, the trial court's findings are affirmed without prejudice to give him time to timely file post-conviction motions challenging his sentencing. Affirmed.
Court: Florida Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Hendon, Filed On: June 7, 2023, Case #: 22-1232, Categories: Firearms, murder, sentencing
J. Sparks finds the lower court properly sentenced defendant in this matter where defendant stabbed three people, killing two of them and permanently injuring another after a confrontation. Defendant was convicted on two specifications of premeditated murder and one specification of attempted premeditated murder and sentenced by the trial court to death. On appeal, the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals upheld his convictions, but found evidence of ineffective assistance of trial counsel for failing to investigate some mitigating evidence. Though it found no prejudice, defendant’s sentence was reevaluated and changed to life without the possibility of parole, a reduction in grade, reprimand and dishonorable discharge. The instant court finds no error in the lower court’s findings. Affirmed.
Court: Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, Judge: Sparks, Filed On: June 5, 2023, Case #: 22-0090, Categories: Ineffective Assistance, murder, sentencing
J. Pucinski affirms a lower-court ruling denying defendant’s third request to challenge the constitutionality of his prison sentence, based on youth and background. It is true that the 56-year sentence the defendant received for a murder and home invasion he committed at age 22 was effectively a life sentence. However, based on the current legal landscape and relevant facts of the case, the trial court properly denied the defendant’s petition.
Court: Illinois Appellate Court, Judge: Pucinski, Filed On: June 5, 2023, Case #: 1211405-U, Categories: Juvenile Law, murder, sentencing
J. Wiley finds that defendant's conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm did not violate the Second Amendment, which is a constitutional right limited by Supreme Court decisions. Any error by the state's characterization of the provocation needed to support a voluntary manslaughter instruction was harmless, defendant was not due a self-defense instruction because no evidence showed he thought he was in danger, and involuntary manslaughter was off the table because he deliberately loaded a gun and moved to confront the victim at close quarters. The trial court must correct its sentencing order so that the 16-month sentence for the firearm conviction runs concurrently with his murder sentence. Reversed in part.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Wiley, Filed On: June 5, 2023, Case #: B319448, Categories: Firearms, murder, sentencing
J. Cassel finds the trial court, on remand for resentencing, properly sentenced defendant for two murder convictions and one attempted murder conviction to consecutive sentences “amounting to a life sentence.” No evidence shows that the court failed to consider relevant mitigating factors. A full evidentiary hearing was held prior to resentencing, giving defendant an opportunity to present mitigating factors. The record shows that the court read and reviewed all evidence. The court explicitly stated that all evidence was weighed and the sentences were based upon relevant factors. Affirmed.
Court: Nebraska Supreme Court, Judge: Cassel, Filed On: June 2, 2023, Case #: S-22-568, Categories: Evidence, murder, sentencing
J. Ryan finds defendant's attorney did not provide ineffective assistance when he failed to object to the trial court's joinder of both defendant's indictments. All of the criminal charges were part of a single course of criminal conduct that occurred over a period of several days, while the evidence for each charge was distinct and unlikely to confuse the jury. Meanwhile, the trial court was not required to make factual findings before it imposed consecutive sentences because the life without parole sentence for defendant's murder conviction made the rest of the sentences purely academic, according to previous rulings from this court. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Ryan, Filed On: June 1, 2023, Case #: 2023-Ohio-1817, Categories: Ineffective Assistance, murder, sentencing
J. Groban finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for murder, though the court of appeal improperly affirmed the sentencing enhancements for his association with a criminal street gang and for firearm use. The jury was not instructed, as required by a recent Assembly Bill, that the predicate offenses must have “commonly benefited [the] criminal street gang, and the common benefit from the offenses is more than reputational.” It was not proven whether defendant’s claims of gang association were true or not, and the firearm enhancement is contingent upon the gang enhancement. The court of appeal’s affirmation of the enhancements is reversed and remanded.
Court: California Supreme Court, Judge: Groban, Filed On: May 25, 2023, Case #: S273134, Categories: murder, sentencing, Gangs
J. Womack finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for murder. Defendant was observed stabbing the victim by witnesses on a two-day long excursion involving the acquisition of drugs, firearms and owed money. The arrest was made and evidence was gathered with the help of the witnesses. Certain claims of error are not preserved and are subject to no exceptions. Defendant was not prevented from testifying about the victim’s past and self-defense instructions were properly given to the jury. All evidence was properly admitted, and defendant’s habitual offender status was properly applied at sentencing. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Supreme Court, Judge: Womack, Filed On: May 25, 2023, Case #: CR-22-498, Categories: Evidence, murder, sentencing
J. Gould finds that the district court improperly denied defendant's habeas corpus petition challenging his conviction and 10-to-25-year sentence for second-degree murder. Defendant showed that his attorney's decision to waive closing argument was not based on strategy and that he was prejudiced by his counsel’s waiver. Reversed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Gould, Filed On: May 24, 2023, Case #: 22-15557, Categories: Ineffective Assistance, murder, sentencing