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 »

×

June 17, 2006

I want to spend a beautiful day like this writing this stuff about as much as you want to spend it reading it, so let's get to the Weekly Roundup so we can all get outdoors and enjoy the sunshine.

RC 3119.79(A) provides that if a party asking for a modification of child support shows that the obligation would increase or decrease by 10% from the previous order, it constitutes a change of circumstances allowing a change in the order. The 10th District holds that this isn't a prerequisite: the court can modify support even if the 10% rule isn't met... 10th District also upholds trial court's grant of default judgment and dismissal of defendant's counterclaim as sanction for defendant's consistent failure to attend deposition... 9th District finds that trial court doesn't abuse discretion by granting lifetime alimony in a marriage of "long duration," 26 years in this case... 8th District holds hearsay rules aren't applicable in small claims proceeding. Case involved veterinary malpractice, and could serve as a manual for how magistrates shouldn't conduct a hearing...

3rd District determines that trial court didn't do sufficient job of determining that defendant should be allowed to represent himself; good discussion of steps court should take in accepting waiver...12th District says that theft by deception and receiving stolen property are allied offenses, when it's the same property; case involved a money order which defendant claimed he received "after he responded to an email soliciting his help in claiming money from a Nigerian bank"... 3rd District holds that even if sobriety tests are not properly given, arrest is valid if the "totality of the circumstances" shows probable cause... 9th District holds that the amendment of the DWI statute to provide a 20-year "lookback" period isn't unconstitutional as an ex post facto law.

And if you think that Cuyahoga County is the only place where the "name game" gets played in judicial elections, check out the result of this race in Los Angeles:

The rare defeat of a highly regarded sitting judge ousted from the bench Tuesday by a bagel store owner who'd barely practiced law in the last decade sent a jolt through Los Angeles County legal circles, leading some to question whether the system to select judges needs overhauling.

When the ballots were counted it wasn't even close: Judge Dzintra Janavs, a 20-year veteran of the bench, lost by almost 8 percentage points to Lynn Diane Olson, a Hermosa Beach resident and business owner who only late last year reactivated her state bar membership.

Search

Recent Entries

  • June 28, 2017
    Plea Bargaining -- The defendant's view
    A look at the Supreme Court's decision last week in Lee v. United States
  • June 27, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th
    A worrisome decision on expert funding, and, mirabile dictu, a court's dismissal of a case for a discovery violation is upheld
  • June 23, 2017
    Crime and the First Amendment
    Facebook and sex offenders, and encouraging someone to kill himself
  • June 20, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th
    I come a cropper, plus inventory searches and mandatory probation
  • June 19, 2017
    Case Update - SCOTUS
    What's coming up in the US Supreme Court in the next two weeks
  • June 12, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th
    After weeks in the desert, we come upon an oasis of defense wins
  • June 7, 2017
    A switch in time
    Why what the Supreme Court did in Aalim II and Gonzales II is a bad thing
  • June 6, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th
    A turnabout on prior calculation and design, and harmless error in all its manifestations
  • June 5, 2017
    Case Update
    A death penalty case, fourteen years after the crime, and we're just getting started. And two appellate decisions on search and seizure.
  • May 31, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th
    "What's a law enforcement accountability activist?" asked someone never, but the answer is here. Plus, cell phone experts, joinder, and the fading glory that was State v. Hand.