Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Belcher

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided July 24, 2017No. CA2016–12–102Published

1DissentPiper, J.

{¶ 36} I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion for two reasons. First, I do not find Cunningham dispositive of the state's first argument on appeal. The facts of Cunningham are narrow and specific, dealing with a motion for judicial release that was timely filed, subsequently withdrawn, and then refiled untimely. Furthermore, Cunningham's analysis and holding involved judicial release modifying a sentence for felonies of the third, fourth, and fifth degrees, whereas Belcher's judicial release involves felonies of the first and second degrees. Thus, I would find that the state has a…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hawley v. RitleyOhio Supreme Court · 1988
  2. State v. PeaglerOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  3. State v. YarbroughOhio Supreme Court · 2004
  4. State v. KollerOhio Court of Appeals · 2014

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

Powered by the Exa API