State v. Allen
Citations
- 2024 Ohio 2188
Syllabus
CRIM.R.33(B) — UNAVOIDABLE PREVENTION: The common pleas court did not abuse its discretion by denying defendant's Crim.R. 33(B) motion for leave to file a new-trial motion based on newly discovered evidence: Defendant could not demonstrate that he was unavoidably prevented from discovering the evidence upon which he now relies to support his new-trial motion where he did not specify what evidence had been recently discovered or suppressed, and, presuming the evidence to which defendant was referring was the arresting officer's statement, defendant cannot show that it had been suppressed by the state when defense counsel acknowledged on the record that he had received the statement in discovery.
Judges: Zayas
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCites
10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court· 1963-05-13· cited 33,902×
- Goldfuss v. DavidsonOhio Supreme Court· 1997-06-25· cited 1,335×
- State v. GreerOhio Supreme Court· 1981-05-13· cited 218×
- State v. Bethel (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court· 2022-03-22· cited 161×
- State v. HattonOhio Supreme Court· 2022-11-10· cited 113×
- State v. Wintermeyer (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court· 2019-12-17· cited 80×
- State v. McNealOhio Supreme Court· 2022-08-09· cited 66×
- Braidy v. BraidyOhio Court of Appeals· 2013-12-04· cited 7×
- State v. SmithOhio Court of Appeals· 2023-11-01· cited 6×
- State v. HowardOhio Court of Appeals· 2022-06-24· cited 5×
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.