Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State v. Francis

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 22, 2004No. 2003-1767Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partO’Donnell, J.

{¶ 78} I concur with those portions of the majority opinion that “require a criminal defendant who seeks to withdraw a plea to do so in a timely fashion rather than delaying for an unreasonable length of time,” and I also concur with the majority’s adoption of a substantial-compliance standard for evaluating a motion to withdraw a plea filed pursuant to R.C. 2943.03(D). However, I respectfully dissent from the portion of the majority’s decision remanding this matter to the trial court to conduct a further hearing on Francis’s original motion to withdraw.

{¶ 79} In my view, the timeliness of an…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. State v. StewartOhio Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Douglas Fruchtman v. Frank Kenton, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1976
  3. Frank E. Bachner v. United States of America, (Two Cases). United States of America v. Frank E. BachnerCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1975
  4. United States v. Joseph J. MaggioCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1975
  5. Garth McRae v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1976

5 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