Legal Opinion

State v. Schleiger (Slip Opinion)

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided September 23, 2014No. 2013-0743 and 2013-1046PublishedCited by 49 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtO’Donnell, J.

{¶ 1} The Twelfth District Court of Appeals certified the following conflict question for resolution: “Whether a defendant is entitled to counsel when a trial court conducts a resentencing hearing for the purpose of imposing statutorily mandated post-release control.” We accepted the conflict and one proposition of law from Curtis D. Schleiger’s discretionary appeal: “A defendant has the right to counsel at a felony resentencing hearing regardless of the scope of the hearing.”

{¶ 2} We answer the certified question in the affirmative because a resentenc-ing hearing is a critical stage of a…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  2. United States v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Gardner v. FloridaSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  4. Mempa v. RhaySupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  5. State v. FischerOhio Supreme Court · 2010

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

3Cited by49 opinions

  1. State v. Davis (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2020
  2. State v. Hackett (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2020
  3. State v. BodeOhio Supreme Court · 2015
  4. State BanksOhio Court of Appeals · 2015
  5. State v. OttOhio Court of Appeals · 2017

44 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