State v. King
Citations
- 2025 Ohio 1570
Syllabus
Appellant entered his plea in a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary manner. He concedes that the trial court complied with Crim.R. 11, and the record reflects that he was not forced into entering the plea agreement. Further, the record shows no sign of ineffective assistance of counsel; the plea was made in a voluntary manner, and trial counsel stated that he was prepared for trial. Judgment affirmed.
Judges: Epley
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
1 case in this archive cites this case.
Cites
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×
- State v. Dangler (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court· 2020-05-05· cited 408×
- State v. BirdOhio Supreme Court· 1998-05-06· cited 170×
- State v. StoneOhio Supreme Court· 1975-07-16· cited 134×
- State v. BrownOhio Court of Appeals· 2012-01-20· cited 69×
- State v. RiddleOhio Court of Appeals· 2017-03-31· cited 24×
- State v. HarrisOhio Court of Appeals· 2021-04-23· cited 23×
- State v. PerdueOhio Court of Appeals· 2022-03-11· cited 17×
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.