Legal Opinion

State v. Larkin

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided June 5, 1996No. C-950666PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Per curiam

The state of Ohio brings this appeal, pursuant to leave granted by this court, from the judgment of the trial court granting the motion of the defendantappellee, Michael M. Larkin, for a new trial following his conviction for aggravated murder. In its sole assignment of error, the state argues that the trial court erred by granting the motion on the basis of newly discovered evidence when that evidence failed to meet the requirements of State v. Petro (1947), 148 Ohio St. 505, 36 O.O. 165, 76 N.E.2d 370. For the reasons that follow, we agree with the state and thus reverse.

I

Larkin was found…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. State v. IshmailOhio Supreme Court · 1978
  2. State v. PetroOhio Supreme Court · 1947
  3. Johnson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1908
  4. Jelm v. JelmOhio Supreme Court · 1951
  5. People v. BeathMichigan Supreme Court · 1936

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Awadelkariem v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1998
  2. State v. CondonOhio Court of Appeals · 2004
  3. State v. LuckettOhio Court of Appeals · 2001
  4. People v. BryantAppellate Court of Illinois · 2006
  5. Awadelkariem v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1998

3 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