Skip to main content

State v. Wu

Citations

  • 2025 Ohio 1138

Syllabus

Appellant's plea was knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily entered where the totality of the circumstances indicated appellant understood the nature of the charges and the bill of particulars, which served as the state's recitation of facts, provided a sufficient basis to satisfy the elements of the offenses and to establish venue in Warren County. As enrollment in the violent offender database, R.C. 2903.41 et seq., is a collateral consequence rather than a punishment, Crim.R. 11 does not require a trial court to inform a defendant of the registration and notification requirements before accepting the defendant's guilty plea. Appellant's convictions for aggravated burglary, kidnapping, felonious assault, and retaliation were not allied offenses of similar import. Notice of postrelease control provided at the plea hearing and set forth in the sentencing entry does not correct the trial court's failure to impose postrelease control at the sentencing hearing.

Judges: Hendrickson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cites

18 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.