Legal Opinion · Dissent

Burbrink v. State

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided October 9, 2009No. C-081075Published

1DissentHendon, Presiding Judge

{¶ 15} I respectfully dissent. Both the Ohio and the United States Constitutions provide that no laws shall be passed that impair the obligations of contracts.17 Any change in the law impairing the rights of parties to a contract, or denying or obstructing the rights accruing to either party under a contract, is unconstitutional.18

{¶ 16} A plea agreement is a contract between a criminal defendant and the state that is governed by contract-law principles.19 The law in effect at the time a plea is entered is part of the contract.20 The nature of the plea agreement must *136be examined to determine…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Santobello v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  2. Kiser v. ColemanOhio Supreme Court · 1986
  3. State v. ButtsOhio Court of Appeals · 1996
  4. Ridenour v. Wilkinson, 07ap-200 (11-8-2007)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2007

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

Powered by the Exa API