Ohio Court of Appeals· 4/30/2021
State v. Garst
Citations
- 2021 Ohio 1516
Syllabus
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant's post-sentence motion to withdraw his guilty plea to murder. Retroactive application of Sierah's Law did not violate the Retroactivity Clause of the Ohio Constitution or constitute a breach of appellant's plea agreement. No manifest injustice shown. Judgment affirmed.
Judges: Tucker
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
3 cases in this archive cite this case.
Cites
16 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Blakemore v. BlakemoreOhio Supreme Court· 1983-07-06· cited 14,330×
- Santobello v. New YorkSupreme Court· 1971-12-20· cited 5,257×
- AAAA Enterprises, Inc. v. River Place Community Urban Redevelopment Corp.Ohio Supreme Court· 1990-04-18· cited 1,562×
- Van Fossen v. Babcock & Wilcox Co.Ohio Supreme Court· 1988-04-13· cited 744×
- State v. FergusonOhio Supreme Court· 2008-10-01· cited 154×
- Bielat v. BielatOhio Supreme Court· 2000-01-05· cited 147×
- State v. HubbardOhio Court of Appeals· 2020-03-09· cited 28×
- State v. MorganOhio Court of Appeals· 2020-08-05· cited 15×
- State v. IrvinOhio Court of Appeals· 2020-10-09· cited 14×
- State v. JarvisOhio Court of Appeals· 2020-03-23· cited 13×
- State v. RikeOhio Court of Appeals· 2020-09-30· cited 12×
- State v. HawkeOhio Court of Appeals· 2020-02-14· cited 7×
- State v. JacksonOhio Court of Appeals· 2020-08-18· cited 6×
- State v. LambOhio Court of Appeals· 2021-01-15· cited 6×
- State v. JohnsonOhio Court of Appeals· 2017-12-22· cited 3×
- In re Forfeiture of Property of AstinOhio Court of Appeals· 2018-05-04· cited 2×
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.