State v. Celaya
Citations
- 2025 Ohio 5246
Syllabus
Appellant's trial counsel did not render ineffective assistance in defense of appellant's charges of aggravated possession of drugs and failure to appear. Record shows counsel utilized debatable trial strategies. Trial counsel was also not ineffective by not filing a motion to suppress. Counsel lacked any basis to request suppression of the drug evidence seized by the deputy sheriff. The absence of a motion to suppress related to appellant's other encounter with the deputy was not prejudicial because no evidence related to appellant's possession offence was discovered during that interaction. Judgment affirmed.
Judges: Tucker
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCites
9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court· 1984-06-25· cited 123,578×
- State v. BradleyOhio Supreme Court· 1989-05-10· cited 7,124×
- Kimmelman v. MorrisonSupreme Court· 1986-06-26· cited 3,502×
- State v. MadrigalOhio Supreme Court· 2000-01-05· cited 1,280×
- State v. SmithOhio Supreme Court· 1985-05-15· cited 1,185×
- State v. CookOhio Supreme Court· 1992-12-18· cited 551×
- State v. MillertonOhio Court of Appeals· 2015-01-09· cited 27×
- State v. HallOhio Court of Appeals· 2021-06-04· cited 16×
- State v. DunnOhio Court of Appeals· 2024-02-16· 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.