State v. Lambrecht

Ohio Court of Appeals

State v. Lambrecht

544 N.E.2d 702, 45 Ohio App. 3d 4, 1989 Ohio App. LEXIS 2836

CourtOhio Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 5, 1989

DocketL-89-027

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 544 N.E.2d 702 (State v. Lambrecht) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Lambrecht, 544 N.E.2d 702, 45 Ohio App. 3d 4, 1989 Ohio App. LEXIS 2836 (Ohio Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

Handwork, P.J.

This matter is before the court on the motion of appellant, Richard Lambrecht, for an order of this court staying execution of his sentence and releasing appellant on bail pending this appeal.

Appellant pled guilty to violating R.C. 2925.03(A)(2), aggravated trafficking in drugs, a felony of the second degree, on March 5, 1987, and was sentenced to a period of three to fifteen years in a state penal institution and fined $7,500. That judgment was affirmed by this court on direct appeal on November 13, 1987. Thereafter, appellant filed a petition for post-conviction relief which was denied by the trial court on December 28, 1988. Appellant has sought an appeal from the December 28, 1988 judgment to this court which is currently pending. It is under the appeal from the denial of appellant’s petition for post-conviction relief that appellant has filed the above-referenced motion for bail.

Crim. R. 46(A) provides that: “All persons are entitled to bail, except in capital cases where the proof is evident or the presumption great.” This rule tracks the Ohio constitutional provision. See Section 9, Article I, Ohio Constitution. See, also, R.C. 2953.09. The function of the bail requirement is to ensure the defendant’s appearance during all stages of the criminal proceedings. Crim. R. 46(A). An action for post-conviction relief, however, is a civil action. State v. Milanovich (1975), 42 Ohio St. 2d 46, 49, 71 O.O. 2d 26, 27, 325 N.E. 2d 540, 542. Since appellant is confined pursuant to a final judgment and the post-conviction relief statutes do not provide for release pending determination thereof, we find that appellant is not entitled to bail. Accord State v. Denoon (1966), 8 Ohio App. 2d 70, 72, 37 O.O. 2d 80, 82, 220 N.E. 2d 730, 731. See, also, R.C. 2953.21(G).

Accordingly, we find appellant’s motion not well-taken, and it is hereby denied. It is so ordered.

Motion denied.

Connors and Glasser, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Handwork, P.J.

This matter is before the court on the motion of appellant, Richard Lambrecht, for an order of this court staying execution of his sentence and releasing appellant on bail pending this appeal.

Appellant pled guilty to violating R.C. 2925.03(A)(2), aggravated trafficking in drugs, a felony of the second degree, on March 5, 1987, and was sentenced to a period of three to fifteen years in a state penal institution and fined $7,500. That judgment was affirmed by this court on direct appeal on November 13, 1987. Thereafter, appellant filed a petition for post-conviction relief which was denied by the trial court on December 28, 1988. Appellant has sought an appeal from the December 28, 1988 judgment to this court which is currently pending. It is under the appeal from the denial of appellant’s petition for post-conviction relief that appellant has filed the above-referenced motion for bail.

Crim. R. 46(A) provides that: “All persons are entitled to bail, except in capital cases where the proof is evident or the presumption great.” This rule tracks the Ohio constitutional provision. See Section 9, Article I, Ohio Constitution. See, also, R.C. 2953.09. The function of the bail requirement is to ensure the defendant’s appearance during all stages of the criminal proceedings. Crim. R. 46(A). An action for post-conviction relief, however, is a civil action. State v. Milanovich (1975), 42 Ohio St. 2d 46, 49, 71 O.O. 2d 26, 27, 325 N.E. 2d 540, 542. Since appellant is confined pursuant to a final judgment and the post-conviction relief statutes do not provide for release pending determination thereof, we find that appellant is not entitled to bail. Accord State v. Denoon (1966), 8 Ohio App. 2d 70, 72, 37 O.O. 2d 80, 82, 220 N.E. 2d 730, 731. See, also, R.C. 2953.21(G).

Accordingly, we find appellant’s motion not well-taken, and it is hereby denied. It is so ordered.

Motion denied.

Connors and Glasser, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

544 N.E.2d 702, 45 Ohio App. 3d 4, 1989 Ohio App. LEXIS 2836, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-lambrecht-ohioctapp-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack