State v. Soto

Citations

• 2026 Ohio 1775

Syllabus

Withdrawal of counsel; motion on day of trial; trial strategy; motion for continuance; sufficiency of the evidence; merger; OVI; R.C. 4511.19(A)(1)(a); absence of field sobriety, blood, or urine test; manifest weight of the evidence; jury instruction; refusal to submit to OVI testing; evidence of intoxication. The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it denied defense counsel's motion to withdraw because disagreements over strategy, particularly those presented at the start of trial, do not establish good cause for withdrawal. Additionally, the trial court's denial of defendant-appellant's motion for continuance of trial was not an abuse of discretion because the case had been pending for over a year, the court conducted numerous pretrial hearings, had already granted a continuance several times, and counsel was prepared and ready to proceed to trial. Defendant-appellant's convictions were supported by sufficient evidence and were not against the manifest weight of the evidence. The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it provided a jury instruction that conformed with the Ohio Supreme Court's sanctioned \refusal to submit\ jury instruction, the instruction was applicable to the facts in the case, and reasonable minds could reach the conclusion sought by the instruction.