State v. Black
Citations
- 2020 Ohio 3117
Syllabus
Seriousness remorse sentence trial court factors sentencing factor felony sentence purposes offender contrary to law principles clear and convincing appellate court mitigating recidivism. Defendant's sentence was not contrary to law. There was no objective information in the record to suggest that the court failed to consider R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12 in formulating the sentence, or relied on demonstrably false or inaccurate information when making these considerations.
Judges: E.T. Gallagher
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
6 cases in this archive cite this case.
- State v. JacintoOhio Court of Appeals· 2020-07-16· cited 75×
- State v. D-BeyOhio Court of Appeals· 2021-01-14· cited 30×
- State v. RiemerOhio Court of Appeals· 2021-11-18· cited 10×
- State v. LevisonOhio Court of Appeals· 2021-10-07· cited 8×
- State v. MainesOhio Court of Appeals· 2020-12-10
- State v. LiottaOhio Court of Appeals· 2026-02-19
Cites
6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- State v. FosterOhio Supreme Court· 2006-02-27· cited 3,571×
- State v. Marcum (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court· 2016-03-15· cited 2,307×
- State v. PriceOhio Court of Appeals· 2017-02-16· cited 38×
- State v. OngertOhio Court of Appeals· 2016-04-14· cited 37×
- State v. WilliamsOhio Court of Appeals· 2014-04-17· cited 16×
- State v. MayOhio Court of Appeals· 2013-06-27· cited 15×
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.