State v. Snook

2 Citing cases

  1. State v. Smith

    2010 Ohio 1232 (Ohio Ct. App. 2010)

    Few things can be so relevant as other criminal activity of the defendant [.]" State v. Burton (1977), 52 Ohio St.2d 21, 23, 368 N.E.2d 297; State v. Snook (April 26, 1999), Stark App. No. 1998CA00244 at *4; State v. Starkey, Mahoning App. No. 06 MA 110, 2007-Ohio-6702 at ¶ 17-18. {¶ 119} It appears to this Court that the trial court's statements at the sentencing hearing were guided by the overriding purposes of misdemeanor sentencing to protect the public from future crime by the offender and others and to punish the offender.

  2. Mt. Vernon v. Hayes

    2009 Ohio 6819 (Ohio Ct. App. 2009)

    Few things can be so relevant as other criminal activity of the defendant [.]" State v. Burton (1977), 52 Ohio St.2d 21, 23, 368 N.E.2d 297; State v. Snook (April 26, 1999), Stark App. No. 1998CA00244 at *4; State v. Starkey, Mahoning App. No. 06 MA 110, 2007-Ohio-6702 at ¶ 17-18. {¶ 56} It appears to this Court that the trial court's statements at the sentencing hearing were guided by the overriding purposes of misdemeanor sentencing to protect the public from future crime by the offender and others and to punish the offender.