State v. Mack
Citations
- 2017 Ohio 8397
Syllabus
Successive petition for postconviction relief death penalty res judicata R.C. 2953.23 R.C. 2953.21 Crim.R. 33 ineffective assistance of counsel motion for new trial withholding evidence materiality. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant's untimely and successive petition for postconviction relief and motion to file a motion for new trial where several claims were barred by res judicata and other claims did not cast serious doubt on the convictions in this case.
Judges: Celebrezze
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCites
15 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court· 1963-05-13· cited 33,902×
- United States v. BagleySupreme Court· 1985-07-02· cited 8,539×
- Kyles v. WhitleySupreme Court· 1995-04-19· cited 6,003×
- Weaver v. MassachusettsSupreme Court· 2017-06-22· cited 717×
- State v. GondorOhio Supreme Court· 2006-12-26· cited 691×
- Murray v. GiarratanoSupreme Court· 1989-06-23· cited 547×
- Coulson v. CoulsonOhio Supreme Court· 1983-05-18· cited 232×
- Rogers v. City of WhitehallOhio Supreme Court· 1986-07-16· cited 231×
- State v. MackOhio Supreme Court· 1995-08-30· cited 121×
- State v. MackOhio Supreme Court· 2004-04-14· cited 12×
- State v. SullivanOhio Court of Appeals· 2014-03-27· cited 10×
- State v. CookOhio Court of Appeals· 2014-11-05· cited 6×
- Cleveland v. SchmidtOhio Court of Appeals· 2013-04-18· cited 4×
- State v. RussellOhio Court of Appeals· 2017-05-18· cited 4×
- State v. MackOhio Supreme Court· 2017-02-22· 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.