Skip to main content

State v. Smith

Citations

  • 2024 Ohio 1360

Syllabus

Crim.R. 33 motion for leave to file a motion for a new trial hearing newly discovered evidence recanting witness abuse of discretion unavoidably prevented from timely discovering new evidence findings of fact and conclusions of law. Trial court abused its discretion in denying appellants' motions for leave to file a motion for a new trial without a hearing as it related to witness' recantation of his trial testimony. Appellants submitted documents that, on their face, together with other evidence in the record, could support their claims that they were unavoidably prevented from discovering witness' recantation within the required time frame. Trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant leave to file a motion for a new trial without a hearing based on new information allegedly contained within transcripts from other appellant's trial. Appellant did not submit documents with his motion that, on their face, supported his claim that he was unavoidably prevented from timely discovering any such new evidence. Crim.R. 33 does not require trial court to issue findings of fact and conclusions of law when denying motion for leave to file a motion for a new trial.

Judges: E.A. Gallagher

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

33 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.