Volume 177 — North Eastern Reporter, Third Series

Expert Witness, Manifest Weight

ginseng, constitutionality

Sierah's Law violent offender database allied offenses kidnapping robbery plea agreement retroactivity remedial substantive punitive collateral consequence guilty plea ineffective assistance of counsel plain error. Trial court erred in failing to merge allied offenses where parties agreed that robbery and burglary were allied offenses and the defendant's kidnapping conviction were incidental to the other two allied offenses. The violent offender database registration requirements enacted by Sierah's Law are remedial in nature and therefore do not offend the Constitution's prohibition against the passage retroactive laws. The trial court was not required to inform the defendant of violent offender registration requirements under Sierah's Law because the registration requirements are collateral consequences of conviction rather than punishment. Trial court's failure to comply with mandatory provision requiring it to advise the defendant of his right to rebut the presumption that he is a violent offender required to enroll in Ohio's violent offender database before sentencing was plain error. Defendant established a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel resulting from counsel's failure to move to rebut presumption that the defendant is a violent offender required to enroll in Ohio's violent offender database.

Charging order receiver res judicata legal professional association partnership corporation statutory construction. The trial court erred in granting a charging order and appointing a receiver to administer the charging order in the absence of any legal authority authorizing the court to issue such orders. Res judicata is an affirmative defense and does not deprive the court of subject-matter jurisdiction.

Bail Bonds R.C. 2937.26, Forfeiture Proceedings Surety Liability Show Cause Good Cause Abuse of Discretion

Writ of procedendo writ of mandamus delay in ruling Ohio Sup.R. 40 R.C. 2701.02 undue delay. A request for writ of procedendo was granted where respondent unduly delayed in ruling on matters submitted for determination over 120 days prior to the filing of the action and failed to timely attend to other matters filed after the hearing was conducted. Because the ruling fully disposed of the action, a request for writ of mandamus was denied as moot.

R.C. 2744.02(B)(2) – sewer system – culvert – ditch