Case Citator › State v. Carter

State v. Carter

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Limited by some courts
Court
Supreme Court of Tennessee
Citation
896 S.W.2d 119
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
69 of 69
Citing cases (total)
69
Treatment dates
1997
Limited by some courts
At least one reviewed court has limited this case’s holding to narrower facts or a narrower rule. No reviewed court has overruled it. State v. Carter remains binding but was limited by the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals in State v. Nolan. Carter required trial judges to weigh criminal verdicts as thirteenth jurors and allowed appellate courts to presume that duty was performed when a new trial motion was denied without an express statement.
More on how this was screened

Nolan confined its review of a judge's contrary statements to those made while ruling on the new trial motion. All 69 flagged citations have been read; the 1 confirmed treatment is listed below. The citing-case count uses the flagged-citation count as a floor because a full citation count is unavailable.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

69 later cases cite State v. Carter; 69 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on State v. Carter?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Limited

  • The Court of Criminal Appeals confined its review under Carter to the trial judge's statements while ruling on the motion for new trial.

    State v. Dale Nolan · Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee · filed

    Only if the record contains statements by the trial judge indicating disagreement with the jury's verdict or evidencing the trial judge's refusal to act as the thirteenth juror may an appellate court reverse the trial court's judgment. Carter, 896 S.W.2d at 122. ... We agree with the state's position that we may only consider the statements of the trial judge made in passing on the motion for new trial in our review of the trial judge's actions as thirteenth juror.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads State v. Carter and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace