Ohio's top court declines to change rules on plea deals
Notable Attorneys
Ohio's top court decided Thursday to continue allowing defendants to plead to lesser crimes that don't bear much resemblance to the facts of the original charge.
Some trial court judges argued that such pleas undermine public confidence in the courts, saying the seriousness of a crime sometimes isn't reflected in the end result.
"Baseless pleas are an affront to the very principles our justice system was designed to promote: that is, truth and justice," Michael Donnelly, a judge in Cleveland's Cuyahoga County court, said in a letter to a Supreme Court committee reviewing the use of such pleas.
Plea bargains that stray from the facts in sex crimes can also allow defendants to avoid having to register as sex offenders, Donnelly said.
The Ohio Supreme Court without comment declined by a 4-2 vote to move the proposal forward.
Donnelly said Thursday he was disappointed but would continue to push the issue.
Connecticut, Florida and New Jersey, among other states, require a plea to have some basis in the facts of the crime.
More than 20 states limit prosecutors' ability to resolve drunken driving cases with plea bargains that dismiss or eliminate an impaired-driving charge, according to the National Center for State Courts. New Mexico allows plea bargains as long as one of the convictions includes at least one offense related to driving under the influence.
Related listings
-
High court seems skeptical of mandatory public union fees
Notable Attorneys 01/14/2016The Supreme Court appears ready to deliver a major setback to American unions as it considers scrapping a four-decade precedent that lets public-sector labor organizations collect fees from workers who decline to join. During more than an hour of ora...
-
Court won’t hear case over grant to Planned Parenthood
Notable Attorneys 11/14/2015The Supreme Court has rejected an anti-abortion group’s bid to force disclosure of confidential Planned Parenthood and federal government records about a contract for family planning services in New Hampshire. The justices on Monday let stand a rulin...
-
US appeals court upholds gun laws after Newtown massacre
Notable Attorneys 10/19/2015A federal appeals court has upheld key provisions of New York and Connecticut laws banning possession of semi-automatic assault weapons and large-capacity magazines. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Monday, finding that the core par...
Workers’ Compensation Subrogation of Administrative Fees and Costs
When a worker covered by workers’ compensation makes a claim against a third party, the workers’ compensation insurance retains the right to subrogate against any recovery from that third party for all benefits paid to or on behalf of a claimant injured at work. When subrogating for more than basic medical and indemnity benefits, the Texas workers’ compensation subrogation statute provides that “the net amount recovered by a claimant in a third‑party action shall be used to reimburse the carrier for benefits, including medical benefits that have been paid for the compensable injury.” TX Labor Code § 417.002.
In fact, all 50 states provide for similar subrogation. However, none of them precisely outlines which payments or costs paid by a compensation carrier constitute “compensation” and can be recovered. The result is industry-wide confusion and an ongoing debate and argument with claimants’ attorneys over what can and can’t be included in a carrier’s lien for recovery purposes.
In addition to medical expenses, death benefits, funeral costs and/or indemnity benefits for lost wages and loss of earning capacity resulting from a compensable injury, workers’ compensation insurance carriers also expend considerable dollars for case management costs, medical bill audit fees, rehabilitation benefits, nurse case worker fees, and other similar fees. They also incur other expenses in conjunction with the handling and adjusting of workers’ compensation claims. Workers’ compensation carriers typically assert, of course, that, they are entitled to reimbursement for such expenditures when it recovers its workers’ compensation lien. Injured workers and their attorneys disagree.