Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

3 Ohio St. 2d 205

Lester v. Haskins

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided August 19, 1965

Ohio Supreme Court · decided 1965-08-19

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently September 1985

Relies on Carnley v. Cochran · Gates v. Haskins · Dowd v. Maxwell

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1965-08-19

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1In view of the aforementioned letter from the trial judge, we cannot reasonably infer, as we did in Conlan v. Haskins, Supt. (1964), 177 Ohio St. 65, 202 N. E. 2d 419, Dowd v. Maxwell, Warden (1965), 3 Ohio St. 2d 117, and Ahlbin v. Maxwell, Warden (1965), 3 Ohio St. 2d 120, (1) that the trial judge probably performed his statutory duty to inform peti*206tioner of his right to counsel at state expense and (2) that petitioner thereafter waived his right to such counsel. See Gates v. Haskins, Supt. (1965), 3 Ohio St. 2d 27. Also, unlike in Seymour v. Maxwell, Warden (1965), 3 Ohio St. 2d 25, there is no evidence that petitioner knew of his right to counsel at state expense. Hence, pursuant to the decision in Carnley v. Cochran, Dir. (1962), 369 U. S. 506, 8 L. Ed. 2d 70, 82 S. Ct. 884, the judgment of conviction must be set aside. The petitioner is therefore released from custody of respondent and remanded to the Common Pleas Court for further proceedings according to law. See Foran v. Maxwell, Warden (1962), 173 Ohio St. 561, 184 N. E. 2d 398.

¶2Judgment accordingly.

Taft, C. J., Zimmerman, Matthias, Herbert and Brown, JJ., concur.O’Neill and Schneider, JJ., concur in judgment only.
/3/ohiost2d/205 · .json · Public domain