State v. Kronenberg
Citations
- 2024 Ohio 1159
Syllabus
App.R. 26(B) ineffective assistance of counsel allied offenses, violation of a protection order menacing by stalking, telecommunications harassment incorporating argument and genuine issue. The court granted the application to reopen because appellate counsel's attempt to \short-cut\ an argument by merely incorporating it into the brief was deficient representation. The argument that violating a protection order merged with telephone harassment presented a genuine issue that deserved to be heard on the merits.
Judges: Celebrezze
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCites
6 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. MurnahanOhio Supreme Court· 1992-02-19· cited 753×
- State v. ReedOhio Supreme Court· 1996-02-14· cited 335×
- State v. O'BrienOhio Court of Appeals· 2013-01-07· cited 12×
- State v. KronenbergOhio Court of Appeals· 2023-05-25· cited 1×
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.