 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| State v. Jenkins, Court of Appeals No. L-05-1405,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, LUCAS COUNTY, January 12, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As defendant did not attempt to enter an Alford plea, defendant's claim that the trial court had a policy of not accepting such pleas and that it should have allowed him to enter such a plea because he had maintained his innocence throughout the proceedings was not reviewable on appeal, as the alleged error was not preserved.
|
|||||
| State v. Leasure, Court of Appeals No. L-05-1260,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, LUCAS COUNTY, January 12, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As a trial court relied on the discretionary factors under R.C. § 2929.12(B) through (D) in imposing a non-minimum term of imprisonment on defendant, there was no violation of his Sixth Amendment rights under Foster, Apprendi, and Blakely; however, imposition of consecutive terms under R.C. § 2929.14(E)(4) was error.
|
|||||
| State v. Love, C.A. CASE NO. 21568,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, MONTGOMERY COUNTY, January 12, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The definition of "detention" was not vague, and the conduct prohibited by R.C. § 2921.34, regarding escape, was clear. R.C. § 2921.01(E) provided defendant with notice that, as a person on release from a state correctional institution, he was under detention and he knew that if he were to break his detention, he would be convicted of escape.
|
|||||
| State v. Perkins, C.A. CASE NO. 21515,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, MONTGOMERY COUNTY, January 12, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Since only 29 of defendant's 90 days of speedy trial time had been charged against the State by the time he entered his plea, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the's motion for dismissal for speedy trial violations. The time was tolled, under R.C. § 2945.72, due to defendant's lack of counsel for 39 days and his continuances.
|
|||||
| State v. Russell, C.A. CASE NO. 21458,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, MONTGOMERY COUNTY, January 12, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Since defendant had abandoned the premises prior to the time of the search, he lacked standing to raise the Fourth Amendment issue as a reason for excluding the evidence. Defendant stipulated that he had vacated the apartment, a killing had occurred there, and he no longer had a reasonable expectation of privacy.
|
|||||
| State v. Slone, C.A. CASE NOS. 2005 CA 79, 2006 CA 75,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, GREENE COUNTY, January 12, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Imposition of seven-year sentence upon defendant's conviction for aggravated vehicular homicide was proper as relevant factors other than those expressly identified in R.C. § 2929.12 justified longer sentence, including facts that defendant was driving with twice the legal level of alcohol in his system and that defendant and victim were strangers.
|
|||||
| State v. Walsh, Court of Appeals No. L-05-1270,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, LUCAS COUNTY, January 12, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Sufficient evidence supported the conviction for aggravated theft by deception under R.C. § 2913.02. Defendant, as comptroller, stole funds from his corporate employer in an amount of $ 186,276.84. He tapped corporate accounts to pay off his many personal credit cards, took unauthorized salary increases, cash payouts, and tuition reimbursements.
|
|||||
| State v. Watkins, Court of Appeals No. L-05-1336,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, LUCAS COUNTY, January 12, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court's statements at sentencing that defendant was "smart enough to know better" and that there was a question about whether defendant was really remorseful did not render defendant's sentence unconstitutional under State v. Foster as neither statement fell within the purview of any statutory section declared unconstitutional in Foster.
|
|||||
| Vaughn v. Ohio Dep't of Rehab. & Corr., Case No. 2006-01106,
COURT OF CLAIMS OF OHIO, January 12, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An inmate did not show a prison had actual or constructive notice of his possible fight with another inmate, as its rules did not bar housing him with this inmate in the unit where they were present, nor was any there other evidence of notice, and the inmate did not meet his Civ. R. 56(E) burden to answer the institution's summary judgment motion.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
