Legal Opinion

State v. Campbell

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 20, 2000No. 1998-0980PublishedCited by 344 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMoyer, C.J.

Campbell raises twenty-three propositions of law for our consideration. Finding no infirmity attaching to his conviction, we affirm it. However, a procedural error in Campbell’s sentencing requires correction. We must therefore remand this cause to the trial court for resentencing.

I. Failure to Advise of Right to Allocution

In his first proposition of law, Campbell contends that the trial court violated Crim.R. 32(A)(1) by sentencing him for aggravated murder without advising him of his right to allocution. This proposition has merit.

After the penalty phase, the trial court heard arguments…

2Cases cited71 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Jackson v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  3. Williams v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  4. State v. JenksOhio Supreme Court · 1991
  5. State v. MartinOhio Court of Appeals · 1983

66 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by344 opinions

  1. State v. ConwayOhio Supreme Court · 2006
  2. State v. IssaOhio Supreme Court · 2001
  3. State v. LeonardOhio Supreme Court · 2004
  4. State v. DavisOhio Supreme Court · 2008
  5. State v. McKnightOhio Supreme Court · 2005

339 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API