Skip to main content
· 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 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.