Skip to main content

State v. Pittman

Citations

  • 2023 Ohio 1990

Syllabus

PROCEDURE/RULES – DISCOVERY – CONTINUANCE: The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's motion for a continuance as a requested sanction for a discovery violation when the violation was not willful, the discovery requested would have aided only in trial preparation and defendant was not prejudiced by the evidence. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's motion for a continuance where the inconvenience to the litigants, witnesses and the court from the last-minute nature of the request and the defense's contribution to the circumstances giving rise to the need for a continuance outweighed the facts that the continuance was the first one requested and there was a good-faith basis for the request.

Judges: Winkler

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

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.