State v. Olson-Graf
Citations
- 2024 Ohio 2291
Syllabus
Appellant pleaded guilty to violating a protection order by committing a felony, telecommunications harassment, and violating a protection order. Appellant's argument that her guilty pleas were not knowing, intelligent, and voluntary is without merit. But the trial court erred by failing to merge the three counts as allied offenses of similar import, which the State concedes. Judgment affirmed in part, and reversed in part, and remanded.
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that appeals officers can exercise administrative powers “that are quasi-judicial in nature without violating the separation of powers doctrine”
- explaining that administrative agencies are imbued with the power to perform functions that are quasi-judicial in nature, such as the weighing of evidence
- because an administrative agency exercises executive, judicial, and legislative power, a strict application of the separation of powers doctrine would make the mere existence of an agency unconstitutional
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Tucker
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced 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.