· 10/15/2019

State v. Rognon

Citations

  • 2019 Ohio 4222

Syllabus

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 err in sentencing defendant-appellant because there is not clear and convincing evidence that defendant-appellant's sentences are not supported by the record or otherwise contrary to law.

Judges: Preston

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.