Legal Opinion

Hollingsworth v. Timmerman-Cooper

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided September 4, 2012No. 2011-1095Published

1Opinion of the CourtPfeifer, J.

{¶ 1} Petitioner, Ernest Hollingsworth, filed a habeas corpus action in federal district court, asserting that he had received ineffective assistance of counsel at his criminal trial. Respondent, Deb Timmerman-Cooper, warden of the London Correctional Institution, countered that Hollingsworth’s plea of no contest in the underlying criminal case constituted a waiver of his right to the effective assistance of counsel. Hollingsworth objected, arguing that under Ohio law, the state may not use his no-contest plea and resulting conviction against him, including using the plea as evidence that he…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Wall v. KholiSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
  2. Sears v. WeimerOhio Supreme Court · 1944
  3. State v. MapesOhio Supreme Court · 1985
  4. Rose v. Uniroyal Goodrich Tire Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2000
  5. Allstate Ins. Co. v. SimanskyConnecticut Superior Court · 1998

2 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