Legal Opinion

State v. Bode

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided April 23, 2015No. 2013-1044PublishedCited by 37 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLanzinger, J.

{¶ 1} In this appeal, we consider whether the state may use an uncounseled juvenile adjudication to enhance penalties for an adult conviction for operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated (“OVI”) under R.C. 4511.19(G)(1)(d). We hold that the rule announced in State v. Brooke, 113 Ohio St.3d 199, 2007-Ohio-1533, 863 N.E.2d 1024, applies to juveniles as well as adults. Therefore, an adjudication of delinquency may not be used to enhance the penalty for a later offense under R.C. 4511.19(G)(1)(d) when the adjudication carried the possibility of confinement, the adjudication was uncounseled,…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. In Re GAULTSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Scott v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  3. Nichols v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  4. State v. BrookeOhio Supreme Court · 2007
  5. In re C.S.Ohio Supreme Court · 2007

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

3Cited by37 opinions

  1. State v. Hackett (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2020
  2. State v. Hand (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2016
  3. State v. Mole (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2016
  4. State v. Aalim (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2016
  5. State v. Buttery (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2020

32 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