State v. Rojas
Citations
- 245 N.E.3d 906
- 2024 Ohio 2209
Syllabus
The juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in finding that appellant, who was 19.5 years old at the time of the court's decision, was not amenable to rehabilitation in the juvenile system. The factors in favor of bindover to adult court set forth in R.C. 2152.12(D) outweighed the factors against bindover set forth in R.C. 2152.12(E). In weighing the factors, the trial court was entitled to find the state's expert's opinion more credible than the defense's expert's opinion on amenability.
Judges: Hendrickson
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
2 cases in this archive cite this case.
Cites
10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Middendorf v. MiddendorfOhio Supreme Court· 1998-07-29· cited 277×
- State v. D.B.Ohio Supreme Court· 2017-07-27· cited 31×
- State v. NicholasOhio Supreme Court· 2022-12-02· cited 27×
- State v. JordanOhio Court of Appeals· 2023-02-02· cited 9×
- State v. CunninghamOhio Court of Appeals· 2022-09-30· cited 8×
- State v. EcholsOhio Court of Appeals· 2021-11-30· cited 4×
- State v. RojasOhio Court of Appeals· 2022-07-05· cited 4×
- State v. WalkerOhio Court of Appeals· 2024-02-29· cited 3×
- Ford v. CrawfordOhio Court of Appeals· 2021-02-19· cited 2×
- State v. PeakOhio Court of Appeals· 2024-02-29· cited 1×
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.