Skip to main content

State v. Robinson

Citations

  • 2017 Ohio 2703

Syllabus

The defendant-appellant's consecutive sentences are not contrary to law because the trial court made the appropriate R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) findings. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in its response to the jury's request for clarification.

Judges: Preston

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

18 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.