Summary
The Ohio Supreme Court dismissed the appeal as improvidently accepted. In a dissent, Chief Justice Brown argued that a trial court has a duty to advise a witness previously charged in connection with the same events of the witness’s Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, even after the witness has pleaded guilty and been sentenced.
Holdings
- The appeal was dismissed sua sponte as having been improvidently accepted.
Questions Presented
- Whether a trial court must advise a witness of the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination when the witness previously was charged with offenses arising from the same incident as the defendant on trial, even if the witness's charges have been resolved by a guilty plea and sentence.
- Whether the Supreme Court of Ohio should reach the claimed Fifth Amendment and codefendant-testimony issue in the accepted appeal.
Disposition
dismissed
Cases Cited (7)
- State v. Schaub (1976), 46 Ohio St. 2d 25, 27-28, 75 O.O.2d 94, 346 N.E.2d 295(followed)
- State v. Oden (July 21, 1977), Cuyahoga App. No. 36241, 1977 WL 201460(followed)
- State v. Carter, Pickaway App. No. 07CA1, 2007-Ohio-2532, ¶ 15(followed)
- Mitchell v. United States (1999), 526 U.S. 314, 325-326, 119 S. Ct. 1307, 143 L. Ed. 2d 424(followed)
- United States v. Seavers (C.A.6, 1973), 472 F.2d 607, 611(followed)
- State v. Tolbert (1991), 60 Ohio St.3d 89, 573 N.E.2d 617(followed)
- State v. Poole, 185 Ohio App. 3d 38, 2009-Ohio-5634, 923 N.E.2d 167, ¶ 32(discussed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…