Ohio Court of Appeals· 1/25/2019

State v. Dixon

Citations

2019 Ohio 230

Syllabus

The trial court did not err in denying Appellant's pro se \Motion to Correct Illegal Sentence\ and a corresponding supplemental motion, because all the claims raised therein were barred by res judicata. Judgment affirmed.

Judges: Welbaum

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

10 cases in this archive cite this case.

State v. Clemmons
Ohio Court of Appeals· 2019-07-26· cited 14×
State v. Dixon
Ohio Court of Appeals· 2021-01-29· cited 3×
State v. Ramey
Ohio Court of Appeals· 2021-04-30· cited 3×
State v. Dixon
Ohio Court of Appeals· 2020-05-01· cited 2×
State v. Sage
Ohio Court of Appeals· 2020-07-02· cited 2×
State v. Gordon
Ohio Court of Appeals· 2024-02-13· cited 2×
State v. Weber
Ohio Court of Appeals· 2020-10-09· cited 1×
State v. Clemmons
Ohio Court of Appeals· 2022-01-07· cited 1×
State v. Jennings
Ohio Court of Appeals· 2020-10-02
State v. Dixon
Ohio Court of Appeals· 2022-06-17

Cites

9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

State v. Perry
Ohio Supreme Court· 1967-05-03· cited 2,571×
Grava v. Parkman Township
Ohio Supreme Court· 1995-08-30· cited 1,323×
State v. Steffen
Ohio Supreme Court· 1994-09-28· cited 454×
State v. Collins
Ohio Court of Appeals· 2013-08-23· cited 44×
State v. McCain
Ohio Court of Appeals· 2017-09-08· cited 15×
State v. Collins
Ohio Court of Appeals· 2018-11-30· cited 13×
State v. Dixon
Ohio Court of Appeals· 2016-08-26· cited 6×
State v. Dixon
Ohio Court of Appeals· 2018-10-12· cited 2×
State v. Rollins
Ohio Court of Appeals· 2018-11-09· cited 2×

Other cases with this name

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.