Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

38 Ohio App. 3d 160

529 N.E.2d 208

State v. Darmour

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided October 26, 1987

Ohio Court of Appeals · decided 1987-10-26

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“A trial court does not err by imposing a sentence greater than `that forming the inducement for the defendant to plead guilty when the trial court forewarns the defendant of the applicable penalties, including the possibility of imposing a greater sentence than that recommended by the prosecutor.'”

quoted by 7 later decisions, including State v. Dunbar, 87317 (6-28-2007), State v. Little

“[n]o abuse of discretion is present when the trial court forewarns a defendant that it will not consider itself bound by any sentencing agreement and defendant fails to change his plea.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including State v. Keyes, Unpublished Decision (9-26-2006)

Relies on 61 Ohio App. 2d 107 - City of Akron v. Ragsdale

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1987-10-26

How this case has been cited

Cited by 71 later decisions — most recently June 2025 · most notably 154 Ohio App. 3d 250 - State v. Buchanan (2003), 173 Ohio App. 3d 443 - State v. Asberry (2007)

71 state decisions

31019871990200020102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1 This cause came on to be heard upon the accelerated calendar pursuant to App. R. 11.1 and Loc. App. R. 25, the record from the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas, the briefs and the oral arguments of counsel. Appellant Harry Darmour contends the trial judge abused his discretion in imposing a sentence greater than that forming the inducement for appellant to plead guilty. Appellant was sentenced to three and one-half years while the state had agreed with appellant to ask the court to impose a two-year sentence.

¶2 Appellant’s assignment of error is overruled for the reason that the trial court has sound discretion to implement a plea bargain agreement. See Akron v. Ragsdale (1978), 61 Ohio App. 2d 107, 15 O.O. 3d 107, 399 N.E. 2d 119, paragraph one of the syllabus. No abuse of discretion is present when the trial court forewarns a defendant that it will not consider itself bound by any sentencing agreement and defendant fails to change his plea. See March 26, 1987 record, at 12-13.

¶3 The judgment of the court of common pleas is affirmed.

¶4 Judgment affirmed.

Pryatel, P.J., Ann McManamon and Patton, JJ., concur.
/38/ohioapp3d/160 · .json · Public domain