State v. Harris
Citations
- 197 N.E.3d 993
- 2022 Ohio 3310
Syllabus
SENTENCING – POSTRELEASE CONTROL – APPELLATE REVIEW/CRIMINAL – R.C. 2929.191: When neither the state nor defendant had appealed the original sentencing entry, the trial court did not err in finding that R.C. 2929.191 applied and informing defendant about postrelease control, as well as the consequences of violating the terms of postrelease control, because even though the Ohio Supreme Court has held that the trial court's failure to properly impose postrelease control rendered the court's judgment voidable, not void, because the legislature has not amended or repealed the statute, the Ohio Supreme Court has not squarely addressed its continued viability, and a court cannot substitute is judgment for that of the legislature.
Judges: Myers
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
3 cases in this archive cite this case.
Cites
11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- State v. FischerOhio Supreme Court· 2010-12-23· cited 1,066×
- State v. JordanOhio Supreme Court· 2004-12-01· cited 641×
- State v. SingletonOhio Supreme Court· 2009-12-22· cited 346×
- State v. Harper (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court· 2020-05-14· cited 319×
- State v. DelvallieOhio Court of Appeals· 2022-02-17· cited 274×
- Stetter v. R.J. Corman Derailment Services, L.L.C.Ohio Supreme Court· 2010-03-23· cited 95×
- State v. Bates (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court· 2022-02-22· cited 88×
- In re Estate of CentorbiOhio Supreme Court· 2011-05-18· cited 32×
- Cent. Motors Corp. v. Pepper PikeOhio Supreme Court· 1995-09-06· cited 22×
- State v. BarnetteOhio Court of Appeals· 2020-12-18· cited 9×
- State v. PattersonOhio Court of Appeals· 2021-04-12· 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.