State v. Bonnell (Slip Opinion)
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtO’Donnell, J.
{¶ 1} This court has now come full circle on the question of whether a trial court must engage in judicial fact-finding prior to imposing consecutive sentences on an offender.
{¶ 2} In 1996, the General Assembly limited trial court discretion to impose consecutive sentences by directing courts to make statutorily enumerated findings and to give supporting reasons for doing so at the time of sentencing. Am.Sub.S.B. No. 2, 146 Ohio Laws, Part IV, 7136. However, in accordance with decisions from the United States Supreme Court, this court held in State v. Foster, 109 Ohio St.3d 1, 2006-Ohio-856,…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Ring v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- State v. FosterOhio Supreme Court · 2006
- Oregon v. IceSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1,600 opinions
- State v. BeasleyOhio Supreme Court · 2018
- State v. GwynneOhio Supreme Court · 2023
- State v. Sergent (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2016
- State v. HowellOhio Court of Appeals · 2015
- State v. Gwynne (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2019
1,595 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.