Legal Opinion

Johnson v. Mitchell

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 31, 1999No. 98-2277PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Per curiam

Johnson asserts in his sole proposition of law that the court of appeals erred in dismissing his habeas corpus petition. For the following reasons, however, Johnson’s claims lack merit, and the court of appeals properly dismissed his petition.

First, the Rules of Criminal Procedure, including Crim.R. 32 and 43, do not apply to cases on appeal. Crim.R. 1(C)(1); State v. McGettrick (1987), 31 Ohio St.3d 138, 141, 31 OBR 296, 299, 509 N.E.2d 378, 381, fn. 5. And, as appellee cogently observes, R.C. 2929.06, which requires a resentencing hearing in the trial court when a death sentence is vacated…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Boyd v. MoneyOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  2. State v. McGettrickOhio Supreme Court · 1987
  3. Swiger v. SeidnerOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  4. Marshall v. LazaroffOhio Supreme Court · 1997

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Johnson v. HudsonOhio Supreme Court · 2008
  2. State ex rel. Johnson v. PinedaOhio Supreme Court · 2010
  3. State v. GardunoOhio Court of Appeals · 2013
  4. State v. CottenOhio Court of Appeals · 2013
  5. Taylor v. BradshawOhio Court of Appeals · 2016

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