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

  • 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.