State v. Ojile
Citations
- 2021 Ohio 2955
Syllabus
NEW TRIAL: The common pleas court erred in denying defendant's Crim.R. 33(B) motion for leave to file a motion for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence: the motion and its supporting evidence provided clear and convincing proof that he had, within 120 days of the return of the verdicts, been unavoidably prevented from discovering, and from presenting in a new-trial motion, the evidence upon which his proposed new-trial motion depended and his delay in moving for leave after the new-trial ground was discovered was adequately explained and demonstrated to have been reasonable under the circumstances.
Judges: Bock
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
5 cases in this archive cite this case.
Cites
6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- State v. SchiebelOhio Supreme Court· 1990-10-26· cited 1,644×
- State v. ThompsonOhio Supreme Court· 1987-10-07· cited 525×
- State ex rel. Dinardo v. Chester Twp.Ohio Supreme Court· 2013-04-24· cited 36×
- State v. OjileOhio Court of Appeals· 2012-12-21· cited 28×
- State v. CarusoneOhio Court of Appeals· 2013-11-15· cited 13×
- State v. OjileOhio Court of Appeals· 2017-12-29· cited 3×
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.