Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Cruzado v. Zaleski

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided November 22, 2006No. 2006-1007PublishedCited by 320 opinions

1Per curiam

*354{¶ 1} This is an original action for a writ of prohibition to vacate an entryresentencing a criminal defendant. The new sentencing entry includes a statutorily mandated period of postrelease control that was not present in the original sentencing entry. The trial court judge did not patently and unambiguously lack jurisdiction to issue the new entry, because the defendant’s original sentence had not expired, and therefore we deny the writ.

Robbery and Attempted Escape: 2003 Common Pleas Court Proceedings

{¶ 2} In February 2003, in separate indictments, relator, Brandon Cruzado, was charged with…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. State v. JordanOhio Supreme Court · 2004
  2. State v. BeasleyOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  3. Hernandez v. KellyOhio Supreme Court · 2006
  4. State ex rel. Fogle v. SteinerOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  5. State ex rel. White v. JunkinOhio Supreme Court · 1997

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by320 opinions

  1. State v. SimpkinsOhio Supreme Court · 2008
  2. State v. SingletonOhio Supreme Court · 2009
  3. State v. Harper (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2020
  4. People v. WilliamsNew York Court of Appeals · 2010
  5. State v. Henderson (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2020

315 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