State v. Newman

Ohio Supreme Court
State v. Newman, 100 Ohio St. 3d 24 (Ohio 2003)
795 N.E.2d 663
Connor, Donnell, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Stratton, Sweeney

State v. Newman

Opinion of the Court

{¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is reversed, and the cause is remanded to the trial court for resentencing on the authority of State v. Comer, 99 Ohio St.3d 463, 2003-Ohio-4165, 793 N.E.2d 473.

Moyer, C.J., Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur. O’Connor, J., concurs separately. Lundberg Stratton, J., dissents. O’Donnell, J., not participating.

Concurring Opinion

O’Connor, J.,

concurring.

{¶ 2} Although I dissented in State v. Comer, 99 Ohio St.3d 463, 2003-Ohio-4165, 793 N.E.2d 473, I recognize that Comer is now the law. As such, the sentencing procedure for ordering a consecutive sentence should be the same as for ordering a maximum sentence. Thus, I concur here.

Dissenting Opinion

Lundberg Stratton, J.,

dissenting.

{¶ 3} For the reasons expressed in Judge Grady’s dissent in State v. Comer, 99 Ohio St.3d 463, 2003-Ohio-4165, 793 N.E.2d 473,I respectfully dissent.

Reference

Full Case Name
The State of Ohio v. Newman
Cited By
26 cases
Status
Published