Welcome to The Briefcase

Commentary and analysis of Ohio criminal law and whatever else comes to mind, served with a dash of snark.  Continue Reading »

×

May 15, 2006

The court holds that the trial judge went too far in dismissing the indictment for failure to provide discovery in State v. Warfield, holding that the lower court should have imposed a less Draconian sanction, such as exclusion of the evidence at trial.

Maybe, but then again. . . . The trial court had ordered the prosecution to produce a rental receipt, which was the key evidence, by the pretrial date of February 17, 2005. This is the colloquy between the judge and the prosecutor on that date: 

The Court: You talked to Detective Pirinelli and he said he was not bringing it?

Ms. Cameron: That’s correct, but I talked with him last week.

The Court: Oh, okay was there a reason why he was refusing to bring it?

Ms. Cameron: He’s not on duty now and he doesn’t have a subpoena so he wasn't going to come down to court.

The Court: You’re saying a week ago he said I won’t bring it because I’m not under subpoena?

Ms. Cameron: He told me on February 11th.

The Court: That he’s not on duty today and he wouldn’t bring it without a subpoena?

Ms. Cameron: Yes.

The Court: Did you issue a subpoena?

Ms. Cameron: No, Your Honor, I didn’t have authority to.

That's the kind of thing that will make you give some serious thought to a jury waiver on remand.

Search

Recent Entries

  • July 26, 2017
    Supreme Court Recap - 2016 Term
    My annual review of the Supreme Court decisions from the past term
  • July 24, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th
    Some things we knew, some things we didn't
  • July 21, 2017
    Friday Roundup
    Computers and sex offenders, civil forfeiture, and phrases that should be put out to pasture
  • July 20, 2017
    Case Update
    A look at the Ohio Supreme Court's decision in State v. Oles, and did you know that Justice Ginsburg has a .311 batting average with runners in scoring position? Oh, wait...
  • July 18, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th
    Judicial bias, RVO specs, 26(B) stuff, waivers of counsel... And more!
  • July 17, 2017
    No more Anders Briefs?
    I have a case now in the 8th District where I came close to filing an Anders brief the other week. It's an appeal from a plea and sentence. The plea hearing was flawless. The judge imposed consecutive sentences, and...
  • July 13, 2017
    Sex offenders and the First Amendment
    Analysis of the Supreme Court's decision in Packingham v. North Carolina
  • July 12, 2017
    Removing a retained attorney
    What does a judge do if he thinks a retained attorney in a criminal case isn't competent?
  • July 11, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th
    The court does good work on a juvenile bindover case, and the State finally figures out that it should have indicted someone in the first place
  • July 10, 2017
    Case Update
    SCOTUS ends its term; the Ohio Supreme Court issues another opinion, and likely the last one, on the trial tax