State v. Chapman

Citations

• 2019 Ohio 176

Syllabus

Motion for new trial leave Crim.R. 33, Loc.R. 11(D) untimely abuse of discretion. Judgment affirmed. The trial court's denial of defendant's motion for a new trial was proper because the defendant did not file a motion for new trial within the time prescribed by Crim.R. 33 and did not seek leave from the court prior to filing the untimely motion. Additionally, the trial court did not have to wait ten days before ruling on the motion for a new trial because Crim.R. 33 does not require a scheduled reply time and the defendant did not seek leave from the trial court to file a reply to the state's opposition.