State v. Stubbs
Annotate this CaseIn 1973, Defendant pleaded guilty to second-degree burglary for which he was sentenced to imprisonment “for his natural life.” In 2011, Defendant filed a pro se motion for appropriate relief (MAR) asking the trial court to set aside his sentence on the burglary charge as cruel and unusual punishment. The trial court granted Defendant’s MAR, vacated the judgment in the second-degree burglary case, and resentenced Defendant to a term of thirty years. After giving credit for time served, the trial court ordered that Defendant be immediately released. The court of appeals reversed and remanded for reinstatement of the original 1973 judgment and commitment. Defendant appealed, arguing that the court of appeals lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the State’s appeal. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the court of appeals has subject matter jurisdiction to hear an appeal by the State of an MAR when the defendant has won relief from the trial court.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.