State v. Jones
Ohio Court of Appeals
2008 Ohio 6994 (2008)
- Written by Rose VanHofwegen, JD
Facts
The day before trial, the court appointed Brian Jones from the public defender’s office to defend Jordan Scott for misdemeanor assault. The next morning, Jones met with six other clients before receiving Scott’s file, then met with Scott for 20 minutes. When the judge stated trial was that day, Jones stated he could not be effective as Scott’s counsel, was uncomfortable representing him, and needed time to interview witnesses. The judge stated three witnesses were present and trial would begin after lunch. Jones stated he needed to interview other witnesses. After break, the court called the case and asked Jones if he was ready to proceed. Jones replied that he was not and had not interviewed witnesses. The judge threatened Jones with contempt unless he proceeded with trial. After the prosecutor waived opening statement, Jones stated he could not participate. The judge threatened Jones with jail. The judge reasoned that if trial resulted in conviction, Scott could simply appeal on ineffective assistance of counsel grounds. Jones refused. The court held Jones in direct contempt, had him taken into custody, and affirmed him guilty of contempt after subsequent hearing. Jones appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (O’Toole, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
