Legal Opinion

State v. Barnes

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided December 30, 1999No. 76686PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

James D. Sweeney, Judge.

An accelerated appeal is authorized pursuant to App.R. 11.1 and Loc. App.R. 11.1. The purpose of an accelerated docket is to allow an appellate court to render a brief and conclusory decision. Crawford v. Eastland Shopping Mall Assn. (1983), 11 Ohio App.3d 158, 11 OBR 240, 463 N.E.2d 655; App.R. 11.1(E).

In this appeal on the accelerated docket, defendant-appellant, William F. Barnes, appeals his conviction for one count of escape in violation of R.C. 2921.34(A)(1) following his plea of no contest. 1 For the reasons adduced below, we affirm.

A review of the record on…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Solem v. HelmSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Harmelin v. MichiganSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  3. Trop v. DullesSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
  4. Crawford v. Eastland Shopping Mall Assn.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1983
  5. State v. ChaffinOhio Supreme Court · 1972

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. RuffinOhio Court of Appeals · 2020
  2. State v. McCormickOhio Court of Appeals · 2020
  3. State v. Myers, 21612 (5-25-2007)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2007

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API