· 3/26/2024
State v. Sharifi
Citations
- 2024 Ohio 1144
Syllabus
The trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying appellant's post-sentence motion to withdraw his guilty plea, as appellant has failed to establish a manifest injustice warranting withdrawal of the plea.
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that when a defendant fails to raise an issue before the district court, the appellate court cannot address it on appeal
- refusing to address issue on appeal that was not raised in the District Court
- rejecting a defendant’s attempt to dispute a stipulation regarding the appropriate sentencing range
- “When a defendant stipulates to a point in a plea agreement, he ‘is not in a position to make ... arguments [to the contrary].’ ”
- “[A] motion under U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1 unaccompanied by a motion under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(e) does not authorize a sentencing court to impose a sentence lower than a statutory minimum.”
- barring defendant from disputing stipulation regarding sentencing range
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Dorrian
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.