Legal Opinion
State v. Boerst
Ohio Court of Appeals
Decided August 1, 1973No. 7157PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMahoney, J.
The defendant (appellant), Francis Boerst, was convicted in Akron Municipal Court, in a trial to the court on December 15,1972, of violating R. C. 4301.22 (B). He was fined $100 and sentenced to five days in the city workhouse. He did not have counsel at trial, or at any other court appearance. Subsequent to trial, he obtained counsel, who filed a motion for a new trial, which was overruled.
The appeal assigns as error the failure of the trial court to inform the defendant of his rights. Defendant’s claimed errors are more succinctly set forth on page five of his brief, in the following…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Boykin v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Pointer v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Duncan v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- City of Hamilton v. BrownOhio Court of Appeals · 1981
- City of Middletown v. McIntosh, Ca2006-07-174 (7-2-2007)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2007
- State v. ThompsonOhio Court of Appeals · 2009
- State v. WilsonOhio Court of Appeals · 2019
- State v. CrandallOhio Court of Appeals · 1983
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.