Legal Opinion

State v. Carlisle

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 22, 2011No. 2010-2158PublishedCited by 84 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtO’Connor, C.J.

{¶ 1} This appeal involves the question of whether the trial court had authority to modify Carlisle’s criminal sentence. Absent statutory authority, a trial court is generally not empowered to modify a criminal sentence by reconsidering its own final judgment. For the reasons explained below, the trial court lacked the requisite authority to modify Carlisle’s sentence. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.

Relevant Background

{¶ 2} On June 8, 2007, a jury found Jack Carlisle guilty of kidnapping and gross sexual imposition (“GSI”) in connection with the sexual assault of…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. State v. LesterOhio Supreme Court · 2011
  2. State v. BakerOhio Supreme Court · 2008
  3. State ex rel. Cruzado v. ZaleskiOhio Supreme Court · 2006
  4. State ex rel. Special Prosecutors v. JudgesOhio Supreme Court · 1978
  5. State ex rel. White v. JunkinOhio Supreme Court · 1997

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

3Cited by84 opinions

  1. State v. BryantOhio Supreme Court · 2022
  2. State v. Gilbert (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2014
  3. Williams v. PeopleSupreme Court of The Virgin Islands · 2013
  4. State v. GilbertOhio Court of Appeals · 2012
  5. Lingo v. StateOhio Court of Appeals · 2012

79 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