State v. Thomas

Ohio Supreme Court

State v. Thomas

2010 Ohio 577, 922 N.E.2d 964, 124 Ohio St. 3d 412

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedFebruary 24, 2010

Docket2009-0630

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 2010 Ohio 577 (State v. Thomas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Thomas, 2010 Ohio 577, 922 N.E.2d 964, 124 Ohio St. 3d 412 (Ohio 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

{¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals entered on March 6, 2009 is vacated. The judgment of the trial court entered on May 12, 2009, resentencing appellee pursuant to the court of appeals’ judgment, is also vacated.

{¶ 2} The cause is remanded to the trial court for a determination of whether postrelease control was properly imposed in appellee’s 2001 sentence and, if not, for resentencing.

Moyer, C.J., and Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor, O’Donnell, and Cupp, JJ., concur. Lanzinger, J., dissents and would dismiss the appeal as having been improvidently accepted. *413 Joseph T. Deters, Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney, and Scott M. Heenan, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellant.

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

{¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals entered on March 6, 2009 is vacated. The judgment of the trial court entered on May 12, 2009, resentencing appellee pursuant to the court of appeals’ judgment, is also vacated.

{¶ 2} The cause is remanded to the trial court for a determination of whether postrelease control was properly imposed in appellee’s 2001 sentence and, if not, for resentencing.

Moyer, C.J., and Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor, O’Donnell, and Cupp, JJ., concur. Lanzinger, J., dissents and would dismiss the appeal as having been improvidently accepted. *413 Joseph T. Deters, Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney, and Scott M. Heenan, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2010 Ohio 577, 922 N.E.2d 964, 124 Ohio St. 3d 412, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-thomas-ohio-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack