Legal Opinion

State v. Layman, 22307 (2-22-2008)

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided February 22, 2008No. 22307PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

{¶ 1} In this appeal, we are asked to determine whether a trial judge who agrees to impose a negotiated sentence is bound by that agreement, even though the defendant fails to appear for sentencing at the appointed time. Reluctantly, we answer "yes."

{¶ 2} On April 9, 2007, Michael Layman entered a guilty plea to fifth degree felony breaking and entering. The trial judge "approve[d] and accept[ed]" the agreement between Layman and the State that if a sentence were imposed, it would not exceed seven months. After pleading guilty, Layman's bond was reduced and he was released from custody…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. BurtonOhio Supreme Court · 1977
  2. State v. Bonner, Unpublished Decision (11-15-2004)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2004
  3. State v. WalkerOhio Court of Appeals · 1989

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. State v. GilroyOhio Court of Appeals · 2011
  2. State v. BlackburnOhio Court of Appeals · 2012
  3. State v. AndersonOhio Court of Appeals · 2014
  4. State v. MillsOhio Court of Appeals · 2015
  5. State v. BakerOhio Court of Appeals · 2018

9 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