Legal Opinion

State v. Smith, 08-Ca-37 (3-6-2009)

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided March 6, 2009No. 08-CA-37PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

{¶ 1} Defendant-appellant Adam R. Smith appeals from his conviction and sentence for Robbery, following a guilty plea, upon remand after his first sentence for that offense was reversed on a previous appeal. Smith contends that in its sentencing decision, the trial court impermissibly punished him for having exercised his right to remain silent.

{¶ 2} We are not persuaded that the trial court impermissibly punished Smith for having exercised his right to remain silent. We conclude that the trial court rewarded an otherwise similarly-situated offender for agreeing to testify for the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. North Carolina v. PearceSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. State v. O'DellOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  3. State v. MorrisOhio Court of Appeals · 2005
  4. Anderson v. KellogOhio Supreme Court · 1980
  5. State v. SmithOhio Court of Appeals · 2007

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. AndersonOhio Court of Appeals · 2016
  2. State v. GatewoodOhio Court of Appeals · 2012
  3. State v. LoweryOhio Court of Appeals · 2023

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API