Legal Opinion

State v. Kalish

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided October 2, 2008No. 2007-1703PublishedCited by 1,056 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtO’Connor, J.

{¶ 1} The issue before us today is yet another remnant from our decision in State v. Foster, 109 Ohio St.3d 1, 2006-Ohio-856, 845 N.E.2d 470. In Foster, we severed the judicial-fact-finding portions of R.C. 2929.14, holding that “trial courts have full discretion to impose a prison sentence within the statutory range and are no longer required to make findings or give their reasons for imposing maximum, consecutive, or more than the minimum sentences.” Id. at ¶ 100.

{¶ 2} In so doing, we recognized that Foster would affect subsequent appellate review of sentencings, noting that “[t]he…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. United States v. BookerSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  2. Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  3. Blakemore v. BlakemoreOhio Supreme Court · 1983
  4. State v. FosterOhio Supreme Court · 2006
  5. State v. AdamsOhio Supreme Court · 1980

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

3Cited by1,056 opinions

  1. State v. Marcum (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2016
  2. State v. HoldcroftOhio Supreme Court · 2013
  3. State v. KingOhio Court of Appeals · 2013
  4. State v. HowellOhio Court of Appeals · 2015
  5. State v. Gwynne (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2019

1,051 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