State v. Pollard
Annotate this CaseAfter a jury trial, Defendant was convicted of felony murder, first degree premeditated murder, and especially aggravated robbery. The trial court merged the murder convictions and imposed consecutive sentences of life for the murder and eighteen years for the especially aggravated robbery. As support for consecutive sentencing, the trial court ruled that Defendant qualified as a dangerous offender. The court of criminal appeals remanded to the trial court for a reconsideration of whether the sentences should be served concurrently or consecutively because the trial court had failed to specifically address underlying factors essential to a dangerous offender classification. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) when a trial court places findings on the record to support its sentencing decision, the applicable standard of appellate review for a challenge to the imposition of consecutive sentences is abuse of discretion with a presumption of reasonableness; and (2) the trial court in this case failed to address the factors required to impose consecutive sentences based on the dangerous offender classification. Remanded for a new sentencing hearing.
Court Description: Authoring Judge: Chief Justice Gary Wade
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.