Stobart v. Haskins
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
Petitioner’s primary contention in this action is that he was tricked into signing a confession and entering his subsequent plea of guilty by promises of the prosecuting attorney and the sheriff that if he would plead guilty he would *74be placed on probation. He contends farther that the sheriff offered a farther indacement that, if he woald confess and plead gailty, no action woald be taken against his yoanger brother.
The Attorney General on behalf of respondent presented as witnesses the prosecuting attorney and the sheriff. Both these witnesses stated they distinctly remembered petitioner,…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Vaughn v. MaxwellOhio Supreme Court · 1965