Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
17 Ohio opinions name it 1 courts 2000–2019 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Ohio courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Xiegreen2 sentences2019Xie, 62 Ohio St.3d at 526 . {¶40} The burden of establishing the existence of manifest injustice is on the individual seeking to vacate the plea. 2019Xie, 62 Ohio St.3d at 526 . | 1 | 15 |
Felton v. Feltongreen1 sentence2009See Felton , 79 Ohio St.3d at 42-42 (holding that pleading is not evidence so answer to petition for protection order cannot be used by court). ¶ {34} In conclusion, without any mention of or allusion to her mental state in the evidence presented to the court, the fairly stringent test of mental distress has not been met under the particular facts and circumstances of this case. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Ohio. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Adams
green
2 sentences2019State v. Adams, 62 Ohio St.2d 151, 157 , 404 N.E.2d 144 (1980). {¶10} Crim.R. 32.1 governs motions to withdraw guilty or no contest pleas and states, “A motion to withdraw a plea of guilty or no contest may be made only before sentence is imposed; but to correct manifest injustice the court after sentence may set aside the judgment of conviction and permit the defendant to withdraw his or her plea.” Therefore, since Appellant’s motion to withdraw is a post-sentence motion to withdraw a guilty plea it can only be granted to correct a manifest injustice. {¶11} This is a fairly stringent standard 2019State v. Adams, 62 Ohio St.2d 151, 157 , 404 N.E.2d 144 (1980). {¶10} Crim.R. 32.1 governs motions to withdraw guilty or no contest pleas and states, “A motion to withdraw a plea of guilty or no contest may be made only before sentence is imposed; but to correct manifest injustice the court after sentence may set aside the judgment of conviction and permit the defendant to withdraw his or her plea.” Therefore, since Appellant’s motion to withdraw is a post-sentence motion to withdraw a guilty plea it can only be granted to correct a manifest injustice. {¶11} This is a fairly stringent standard | 8 | 2013–2019 |
State v. Posta
green
2 sentences2007State v. Posta (1988), 37 Ohio App.3d 144 , 145 , 524 N.E.2d 920 . {¶ 12} Crim.R. 32.1 provides: "A motion to withdraw a plea of guilty or no contest may be made only before sentence is imposed; but to correct manifest injustice the court after sentence may set aside the judgment of conviction and permit the defendant to withdraw his or her plea." While this rule establishes a fairly stringent standard for deciding a post-sentence motion to withdraw a guilty plea, it provides no guidelines for deciding a pre-sentence motion. 2007State v. Posta (1988), 37 Ohio App.3d 144 , 145 , 524 N.E.2d 920 . {¶ 12} Crim.R. 32.1 provides: "A motion to withdraw a plea of guilty or no contest may be made only before sentence is imposed; but to correct manifest injustice the court after sentence may set aside the judgment of conviction and permit the defendant to withdraw his or her plea." While this rule establishes a fairly stringent standard for deciding a post-sentence motion to withdraw a guilty plea, it provides no guidelines for deciding a pre-sentence motion. | 2 | 2006–2007 |
State v. Smith
green
2 sentences2014State v. Smith, 49 Ohio St.2d 261, 264 , 361 N.E.2d 1324 (1977). 2014State v. Smith, 49 Ohio St.2d 261, 264 , 361 N.E.2d 1324 (1977). | 1 | 2014–2014 |
State v. Banks, Unpublished Decision (10-31-2006)
neutral
1 sentence2007No. 05-MA-95, 2006-Ohio-5836 , at ¶ 10 , citing State v. Xie (1992), 62 Ohio St.3d 521 , 526 . {¶ 15} "An appellate court will review the trial court's determination of the Crim.R. 32.1 motion for an abuse of discretion." State v. Desellems (Feb. 12, 1999), 11th Dist. | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.