State v. Holmes
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtDouglas, J.
Holmes entered Richland County without prior approval of the trial court and, hence, violated the third condition of his release. The state of Ohio, appellee, suggests that Holmes’s noncompliance with the condition of his release is a breach of condition of the bail bond and, hence, the forfeiture of a portion of the bond was proper under Crim. R. 46(M).
We disagree. Crim. R. 46(M)2 provides that upon a breach of condition of a bond, the court must declare a forfeiture of the bail. However, Crim. R. 46(M) also requires that forfeiture proceedings be enforced “* * * as provided by law.”…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State v. HughesOhio Supreme Court · 1986
3Cited by21 opinions
- State v. LottOhio Court of Appeals · 2014
- Houser v. ManningDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1998
- State v. SliderOhio Court of Appeals · 2009
- State v. DyeOhio Court of Appeals · 2018
- State v. LeeOhio Court of Appeals · 2012
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.