Punitive Consequences of Sex Offender Classification

Subscribe to Punitive Consequences of Sex Offender Classification via RSS

Merit Decision: Sex Offender Fails to Show Prejudice in Trial Court’s Incomplete Explanation of All Requirements Attached to Sex Offender Classification. State v. Dangler

By Marianna Bettman on May 11, 2020

“There is nothing in the record indicating that Dangler would not have entered his plea had he been more thoroughly informed of the details of the sex-offender-classification scheme… Because Dangler has not established prejudice, he is not entitled to have his no contest plea vacated for a failure to comply with Crim.R. 11(C).”

Justice DeWine…

State v. Dangler Case Still Under Submission After One Year

By Marianna Bettman on February 21, 2020

Update: On May 5, 2020, the Supreme Court of Ohio handed down a merit decision in this case. Read the analysis here.

The Supreme Court of Ohio heard oral argument in in State of Ohio v. Brad J. Dangler, 2017-1703 on February 20, 2019, now over a year ago. At issue in the case…

What’s On Their Minds: Does Failure to Inform a Defendant of All Penalties Associated With a Sex Offender Classification Invalidate the Plea? State of Ohio v. Brad J. Dangler.

By Marianna Bettman on March 4, 2019

Update: On May 5, 2020, the Supreme Court of Ohio handed down a merit decision in this case. Read the analysis here.

“So what aspect at the time of the plea—not sentencing—was there substantial compliance?”

Justice Stewart, to the prosecutor

“What are the words the trial court has to say to be ok?”

Justice DeWine…