State v. Brand
Citations
- 2023 Ohio 3321
Syllabus
NEW TRIAL – CRIM.R. 33(B): The common pleas court did not err by denying defendant's motion for leave to file a new-trial motion where he did not show that he was unavoidably prevented from discovering the grounds upon which his new-trial motion depends: the former juror's affidavit did not describe the attendant circumstances in making the affidavit and the defendant's affidavit did not describe the circumstances attendant to securing the affidavit.
Judges: Crouse
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
2 cases in this archive cite this case.
Cites
8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Blakemore v. BlakemoreOhio Supreme Court· 1983-07-06· cited 14,330×
- State v. SchiebelOhio Supreme Court· 1990-10-26· cited 1,644×
- State v. HattonOhio Supreme Court· 2022-11-10· cited 113×
- State v. CarusoneOhio Court of Appeals· 2013-11-15· cited 13×
- State v. McKnightOhio Court of Appeals· 2021-08-03· cited 11×
- State v. BrandOhio Court of Appeals· 2016-10-26· cited 8×
- State v. BrandOhio Court of Appeals· 2022-04-08· cited 4×
- State v. SmithOhio Court of Appeals· 2020-12-16· cited 3×
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.