 |
|
 |
|
|
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. Bowyer, No. 88014,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, CUYAHOGA COUNTY, February 22, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: There was sufficient evidence for attempted felonious assault, under R.C. § 2903.11 and R.C. § 2923.02, as the evidence did not show that defendant voluntarily abandoned his criminal purpose to seriously harm his mother. The mother, not defendant, left the scene. She went to the safety of her van and called the police.
|
|||||
| State v. Brank, Case No. 2006P090053,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, TUSCARAWAS COUNTY, February 22, 2007, Date of Judgment Entry
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: There was sufficient evidence that defendant violated the terms of his community control, under R.C. § 2929.15, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in it's decision to revoke his community control sanction. The evidence demonstrated that defendant had contact with a three-year-old child who lived nearby.
|
|||||
| State v. Clark, No. 87938,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, CUYAHOGA COUNTY, February 22, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An alleged undisclosed dual representation of defendant and his co-defendant did not let defendant withdraw his guilty plea, under Crim. R. 32.1, after sentencing, as he showed no manifest injustice because he did not show the representation affected his plea's voluntariness or that an actual conflict affected the adequacy of counsel's assistance.
|
|||||
| State v. Douglas, No. 87952,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, CUYAHOGA COUNTY, February 22, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A denial of defendant's motion to withdraw his no contest plea was error because he was not told that additional one- and three-year sentences would be imposed for the firearm specifications attached to the counts he did not contest, so the trial court did not substantially comply with Crim. R. 11(C) by advising defendant of his maximum penalties.
|
|||||
| State v. Henderson, No. 88250,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, CUYAHOGA COUNTY, February 22, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Suppression of evidence found during search of defendant's car should have been ordered since, while defendant violated traffic laws, there was nothing showing that officer had reasonable articulable suspicion during traffic stop that defendant was armed and dangerous and that search of vehicle for weapons was necessary to protect him from danger.
|
|||||
| State v. Loyer, No. 87995,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, CUYAHOGA COUNTY, February 22, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court properly denied defendant's suppression motion with respect to evidence seized from a hotel room that she was in, as the individual in whose name the hotel room was occupied had voluntarily consented to police officers' entry into the room, whereupon they saw drugs and paraphernalia in plain view.
|
|||||
| State v. Mallette, No. 87984,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, CUYAHOGA COUNTY, February 22, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The father's statements about the sexual abuse did not constitute impermissible hearsay, under Evid. R. 801(C). The testimony was not offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted, i.e., to show that the abuse occurred, but to show how the witness proceeded with the information provided by the child.
|
|||||
| State v. Palmer, No. 88003,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, CUYAHOGA COUNTY, February 22, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: There was sufficient evidence to support defendant's conviction for felonious assault under R.C. § 2903.11(A)(2), because, as a result of the assault, the victim suffered acute pain that involved prolonged or intractable pain, in other words, serious physical harm, as defined by R.C. § 2901.01(A)(5). Defendant poked her in the eye and bit her.
|
|||||
| State v. Senu-Oke, No. 05AP-1111,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, FRANKLIN COUNTY, February 22, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Postconviction relief petition was properly dismissed because petition was not filed within 180 days of expiration of time for filing an appeal of his sentence, as required by R.C. § 2953.21(A)(2), and because neither Blakely v. Washington nor U.S. v. Booker created new right entitling defendant to file untimely petition under R.C. § 2953.23(A)(1).
|
|||||
| State v. Smith, No. 88002,
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, CUYAHOGA COUNTY, February 22, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: There was sufficient evidence to support defendant's convictions for escape and failure to verify his address, in violation of R.C. §§ 2921.34 and 2950.06, as testimony from officers and detectives indicated that defendant had failed to attend required counseling, classes, and meetings, and he had failed in his sex offender reporting requirements.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
