 |
|
 |
|
|
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. Merritt, Case No. 06 CA 10,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, RICHLAND COUNTY, February 5, 2007, Date of Judgment Entry
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: R.C. § 2907.321(A)(2), pandering obscenity involving a minor, was not unconstitutionally vague as it provided sufficient notice of its proscriptions. It prohibited materials produced by the use of real children and permitted an inference that the person depicted in the material was in fact a minor if the material represented the person as a minor.
|
|||||
| State v. Miller, Case No. 2006CA00130,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, STARK COUNTY, February 5, 2007, Date of Judgment Entry
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Counsel's actions fell within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance. Counsel's decision to concede on the obvious charges involving testimony from the police officer to preserve defendant's credibility to attack the more serious contested charge of aggravated robbery was viable trial strategy.
|
|||||
| State v. Miniard, CASE NO. CA2006-03-074,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, BUTLER COUNTY, February 5, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As the sentence imposed on an inmate was authorized by law where it did not exceed the statutory maximum for any of the convictions pursuant to R.C. § 2929.14(A), the sentence was jointly recommended by the parties, and it was imposed by the sentencing judge, the sentence was not reviewable pursuant to R.C. § 2953.08(D)(1).
|
|||||
| State v. Shields, CASE NUMBER 9-06-16,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, MARION COUNTY, February 5, 2007, Date of Judgment Entry
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's counsel did not provide ineffective assistance in violation of U.S. Const. amend. VI and Ohio Const. art. I, § 10 in advising defendant to plead guilty, as aggravated robbery and theft were not allied offenses of similar import, and the State had no duty to recite facts at the plea hearing regarding the elements of an offense.
|
|||||
| State v. Vancamp, Case No. 2006CA00017,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, STARK COUNTY, February 5, 2007, Date of Judgment Entry
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Decision revoking defendant's judicial release was affirmed since defendant stipulated that he had violated terms and conditions of community control sanctions. Further, State v. Foster did not apply to re-imposition of balance of defendant's original sentence because the appeal did not present itself on direct review from conviction and sentence.
|
|||||
| State v. Vogt, Case No. 2006CA00183,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, STARK COUNTY, February 5, 2007, Date of Judgment Entry
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Post-release control section of defendant's sentence was vacated, and matter was remanded for imposition of correct specific post-release control period. Defendant was convicted of second-degree felony, so under R.C. § 2967.28(B)(2) proper term of post-release control was mandatory three-year term, not maximum five-year term stated by trial court.
|
|||||
| State v. Wilson, Case No. CT06-0056,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, MUSKINGUM COUNTY, February 5, 2007, Date of Judgment Entry
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As defendant was convicted of gross sexual imposition, in violation of R.C. § 2907.05(A)(3), which was a felony sex offense, a trial court properly imposed a mandatory five-year term of post-release control as part of defendant's sentence, as that was required by R.C. § 2967.28(B).
|
|||||
| State v. Windsor, Case No. 2006-CA-47,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, RICHLAND COUNTY, February 5, 2007, Date of Judgment Entry
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Since defendant was subject to a specific prison term imposed by the trial court at the sentencing hearing for his first violation of community control sanctions, it was not found that he had not been informed of the specific term of imprisonment conditionally reduced by the trial court's granting of early judicial release, under R.C. § 2929.20(I).
|
|||||
| W. Shell Commer. v. Nws, CASE NO. CA2006-06-154 (Accelerated Calendar),
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, BUTLER COUNTY, February 5, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court properly determined that an owner of two companies was personally liable to a real estate broker in an action arising out of a sale of property owned by one of the companies, as the owner had signed the broker contract as president of the non-property-owning company, which was not sufficient to avoid personal liability.
|
|||||
| Williams v. Vahila, CASE NO. 06 CA 832,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, SEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, CARROLL COUNTY, February 5, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As appellant failed to show a meritorious claim or defense and that she was entitled to relief from judgment under Civ. R. 60(B)(5), based on her claim that the trial court judge was biased against her because he was appellee's attorney, there was no abuse of discretion in the trial court's denial of her motion for relief from judgment.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
