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 »

×

Mea Culpa

So here's the deal.  I'm in Fire Drill Mode.  I've got a reply brief due in the 5th District yesterday.  "Yesterday, Russ?  You mean you've got to not only finish the brief, but drive it down to Canton, Mansfield, or wherever to file it?"

Let me feed you, baby birds.  If you're doing an out-of-district appeal, know the following provision of App.R. 13(A), and know it in your soul:

Documents required or permitted to be filed in a court of appeals shall be filed with the clerk. Filing may be accomplished by mail addressed to the clerk, but filing shall not be timely unless the documents are received by the clerk within the time fixed for filing, except that briefs shall be deemed filed on the day of mailing.

So all I have to do is make sure it gets in the mail by the end of the day.  That's still a somewhat daunting task, considering that I have the brief only half-written, in keeping with the guiding principle of my life:  "If it weren't for the last minute, I wouldn't get anything done."

So do I devote every moment to the completion of the brief?  No; I instead decide to complete the blog post I'd mostly done the night before (when I also could have been working on the brief), on the tactical and strategic questions raised by the recent Supreme Court case of State v. Gonzalez.  That case requires the state to present evidence of the purity of cocaine in order to convict someone of more than a fifth degree felony trafficking or possession charge for cocaine.

And in which I wrote the following:

So what are your strategic options?  One is to plead no contest, and if the State doesn't come up with a weight, your client walks away with a 5th degree felony.  And keep in mind that guilt is determined at the time of the plea, not the time of the sentencing; if the State doesn't have proof of weight by the time of the plea, you're home free.

The first sign of trouble emerged just after noon yesterday, with a terse email from one of my numberless horde of loyal readers:

Did you just whiff on the effect of a NC plea?

Long story short, oh, yes, I did.  Majorly.  A no contest plea admits the allegations of the indictment.  If the indictment alleges that you possessed more than 100 grams of cocaine, the State doesn't have to prove weight, it doesn't have to prove purity, it doesn't have to prove squat.  You've just admitted that you possessed more than 100 grams of  cocaine.

I'm tempted to blame it on the drugs I'd taken and the noise in the strip club when I wrote the post, but that would require you, faithful reader, to wholly suspend belief and imagine that I lead a far more exciting life than the facts of my baneful existence would support.  I did attend a party for a friend last night, and my parting words were, "I have to go home and feed my cats, and yes, I know that sounds like a cry for help."

So anyway, I made a mistake, and a biggie.  On the plus side, it's the only mistake I've made.  I thought I did one other time, but I was wrong.

Search

Recent Entries

  • May 25, 2017
    "Clarifying" post-release controls
    A look at the Supreme Court's decision in State v. Grimes
  • May 23, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th
    Allied offenses, and two search cases
  • May 23, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th
    Allied offenses, and two search cases
  • May 22, 2017
    Case Update
    Is SCOTUS looking for a forfeiture case? Plus, appellate decisions on expungement and restitution, plain error, and what a judge has to tell a defendant about sex registration
  • May 19, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th - Part II
    Decisions on lineups and prior calculation and design, and two out of eight (eight!) pro se defendants come up winners,
  • May 17, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th - Part I
    Taking a first look at some of the 8th District's decisions over the past two weeks
  • May 16, 2017
    Case Update
    Stock tips, Federal sentencing reform goes dormant, schoolbag searches, and the retroactivity of State v. Hand
  • May 8, 2017
    Case Update
    Death in Arkansas, a worrisome disciplinary decision, and appellate cases on speedy trial, arson registration, use of prior testimony, and the futility of post-conviction relief
  • May 2, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th
    Nothing but sex
  • May 1, 2017
    Case Update
    SCOTUS closes out oral argument for the Term, the Ohio Supreme Court has seven of them this week, and we report on a decision where you'll probably want to play Paul Simon's "Still Crazy After All These Years" in the background while you read about it