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 »

×

Case Update - Party Edition

Apparently, opinion-writing took second place to some hard partying in the courthouses across the state.  The Columbus Gang handed down an affirmance in a death penalty case, and issued one other case announcement, and there's fairly slim pickings in the court of appeals, too.  The Nine Robed Ones in DC decided to accept the case involving whether the death penalty can be imposed for child rape, and they'll kick off the arguments on Monday with one on whether lethal injection is cruel and unusual punishment.

So, let's get to it:

2nd District holds repairman working in apartment didn't have expectation of privacy, excellent summarization of law on expectation of privacy in those situations... 6th District affirms conviction where jury asked for definition of "substantially" impaired, judge gave them dictionary definition since the term was not definied in the Code... Bad decision from the 1st District on use of restraints on defendant during trial; as dissent points out, trial judge basically deferred to sheriff's decision... 11th District reverses conviction of aggravated vehicular homicide, holds that trial court shouldn't have admitted evidence of his driving under suspension and having done cocaine day before accident... The only civil case of note is one from the 11th District, in which it reverses trial court's order or arbitration in home remodeling contract, finding provision procedurally and substantively unconscionable...

I've often thought that instead of doing this blog, I should spend my time perusing all the various Federal and state business regulations and sue people for violating them.  For example, I run across this from a 10th District decision last week: 

In her sixth claim, plaintiff posited a class action. In it plaintiff alleged defendant violated the Used Motor Vehicle Trade Regulation Rule, commonly referred to as the "Window Sticker Rule," set forth in Section 455.1 et seq., Title 16, C.F.R., resulting in an unfair and/or deceptive act or practice in violation of R.C. 1345.02(A) of the C[onsumer] S[ales] P[ractices] A[ct].

What's the "Window Sticker Rule," you ask?  Well, as you know, our motto at the Briefcase is "we look this crap up so you won't have to," and so:

The Window Sticker Rule requires used vehicle dealers to include the following language conspicuously in sales contracts for used motor vehicles: "The information you see on the window form for this vehicle is part of this contract. Information on the window form overrides any contrary provisions in the contract of sale."

Last, if your client's going to make a statement to the police in an aggravated murder case, hope that he's actually going to wait until the cops tell him about his Miranda rights before he spills his guts:

[Q.] Mr. Wright, what is the highest grade you completed?

[A.] 12th grade. I am trying to - - before we go through all this, man, I want to know what I am down here for, man. They come up in my house, man, and drag me up out of the bed, man, they said something about the lady across the street, or whatever. They said - - they told me that - - they said something about I ran in the house. Okay.

I said I been up there drinking beer. I am buzzed. Okay. And I am up there drinking, man. They come up there and say - - I got my clothes off. I said what did I do? They say nothing. They say just come outside and see if somebody can identify you. If they say  no, no problem, you can go back in the house. She said it wasn't me, but I am down here. You know what I'm saying? I have my sister's neighborhood all messed up. I can't go back to my sister's now, you know, because this is disrespected there, man, you know. And now I am down here, I still don't even know why I am down here, and now you got me here sitting here asking me questions about this, and I don't even know why I am down here, man.

[Q.] Well, I haven't asked any questions about it yet. This is something I have to fill out before I ask you questions.

Search

Recent Entries

  • October 16, 2017
    En banc on sentencing
    The 8th District takes a look at what State v. Marcum means
  • October 13, 2017
    Friday Roundup
    Musings about the death penalty and indigent defense
  • October 11, 2017
    Case Update
    SCOTUS starts its new term, and the Ohio Supreme Court hands down two decisions
  • October 10, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th
    Collaboration by inmates, fun in Juvenile Court, the limits of Creech, and more
  • October 5, 2017
    State v. Thomas
    The Ohio Supreme Court reverses a death penalty conviction
  • October 4, 2017
    Russ' Excellent Adventure
    A juror doesn't like me. Boo-hoo.
  • October 3, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th
    What not to argue on appeal, waiving counsel, the perils of being a juvenile, and expert witnesses
  • September 12, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th
    Prior consistent statements, whether State v. Hand is applied retroactively, and a big Coming Attraction
  • September 11, 2017
    Case Update
    Looking back at Melendez-Diaz, and the 8th goes 0 for 2 in the Supreme Court
  • September 8, 2017
    Friday Roundup
    Pro bono work, screwed-up appeals, and is Subway shorting their customers?