State ex rel. Ware v. Rhodes
Citations
- 243 N.E.3d 751
- 2024 Ohio 1754
Syllabus
Magistrate's decision adopted as no objections were filed. Respondents' motion for summary judgment denied because public records request was not subject to grievance system and therefore the affidavit requirements of R.C. 2969.26(A) did not apply. Relator's motion for summary judgment granted in part and denied in part. Statutory damages awarded.
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that while the distinction between a potential defense and the “mere possibility” of a defense is amorphous, it is accepted that not every mitigating statement requires further inquiry by the military judge
- stating that “[i]f an accused sets up matter inconsistent with the plea at any time during the proceeding, the military judge must either resolve the apparent inconsistency or reject the plea.”
- reaffirming the “possible defense” standard as the threshold that triggers the military judge’s obligation to inquire further
- distinguishing a “pos- sible defense” from the “mere possibility of a defense”
- distinguishing a “possible defense” from the “mere possibility of a defense”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Dorrian
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced 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.