Legal Opinion

State v. Wright

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided May 31, 1990No. Case 89-CA-64PublishedCited by 29 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFain, J.

Defendant-appellant Cedric Wright appeals from the denial of his motion for a new trial, based upon newly-discovered evidence. Wright submitted an affidavit from one of the witnesses against him at trial, in which the witness recanted his testimony. The affidavit was accompanied by a letter from the witness, to the trial judge, stating that: "Cedric Wright did not know until this date, July 3,1989 that I was going to make a notarized statement, and the contents of that statement."

The trial court denied Wright's motion for a new trial, without a hearing, upon the grounds that Wright had failed…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. PetroOhio Supreme Court · 1947
  2. City of Dayton v. MartinOhio Court of Appeals · 1987
  3. State v. ArvanitisOhio Court of Appeals · 1986
  4. Graines v. FleeterOhio Court of Appeals · 1985
  5. State v. EubankOhio Court of Appeals · 1987

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. State v. JohnsonOhio Supreme Court · 2024
  2. State v. CondonOhio Court of Appeals · 2004
  3. State v. MorrisOhio Court of Appeals · 2017
  4. State v. Bush, 08ap-627 (2-3-2009)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2009
  5. State v. QuinnOhio Court of Appeals · 2016

24 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