State v. Burnette
Citations
- 2017 Ohio 8424
Syllabus
The trial court complied with Crim.R. 11(C) before accepting appellant's pleas. The trial court was not required to inform appellant of the elements of each charge against him to ensure that appellant understood the nature of his crimes, and the totality of the circumstances shows that appellant understood the nature of his crimes. Appellant's sentence is not contrary to law.
Judges: Mayle
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
1 case in this archive cites this case.
Cites
13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Boykin v. AlabamaSupreme Court· 1969-06-02· cited 12,640×
- State v. NeroOhio Supreme Court· 1990-12-19· cited 1,637×
- State v. KalishOhio Supreme Court· 2008-10-02· cited 1,234×
- State v. BallardOhio Supreme Court· 1981-06-24· cited 893×
- State v. EngleOhio Supreme Court· 1996-02-14· cited 784×
- State v. ClarkOhio Supreme Court· 2008-07-31· cited 654×
- State v. Montgomery (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court· 2016-08-24· cited 291×
- State v. FitzpatrickOhio Supreme Court· 2004-07-07· cited 198×
- State v. BrimacombeOhio Court of Appeals· 2011-09-30· cited 96×
- State v. AcostaOhio Court of Appeals· 2016-09-02· cited 17×
- State v. RagusaOhio Court of Appeals· 2016-06-10· cited 10×
- State v. MossOhio Court of Appeals· 2017-04-24· cited 4×
- State v. BlevinsOhio Court of Appeals· 2016-12-23· cited 1×
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.