Legal Opinion

In Re C.A.C., Unpublished Decision (8-4-2006)

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided August 4, 2006No. C.A. Nos. 2005-CA-134, 2005-CA-135UnpublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

{¶ 1} C.A.C, a juvenile, appeals both from his adjudication as delinquent, and from his subsequent classification as a sexual predator. He contends that he was not represented by counsel in either proceeding, and that the record does not support a finding that he knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to counsel in either proceeding. Specifically, he contends that he was never clearly informed that he had a right to counsel in connection with his decision whether to admit or deny the allegation of delinquency, and that he never waived that right. We agree. Further, he contends that…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. GibsonOhio Supreme Court · 1976
  2. In Re EastOhio Court of Appeals · 1995
  3. In Re CollinsOhio Court of Appeals · 1969

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. In re C.S.Ohio Supreme Court · 2007
  2. In Matter of P.B., 07ca3140 (6-13-2007)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2007

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

Powered by the Exa API