Skip to main content
· 2/5/2024

Ostigny v. Brubaker

Citations

  • 235 N.E.3d 600
  • 2024 Ohio 384

Syllabus

Pro se appellants appeal decision denying breach of contract claim. Court did not abuse discretion denying request for continuance. Court provided sufficient time to present case and offered ability to file post-trial affidavits, which appellants declined.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that a defendant's alleged expectations of parole did not render his plea involuntary
  • affirming conviction despite a ten-year difference between the defendant’s understanding from plea counsel and actual parole eligibility
  • \An attorney's 'bad guess' as to sentencing does not justify the withdrawal of a guilty plea and is no reason to invalidate a plea.\
  • “In the absence of clear and convincing evidence to the contrary, [the defendant] must be bound by what he said at the time of his plea.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Byrne

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.