State v. Bethel
Annotate this Case
The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the court of appeals affirming the judgment of the trial court denying Appellant's motion for leave to file a motion for a new trial and his motion for a new trial and finding that it lacked jurisdiction to consider Appellant's successive postconviction petition, holding that there was no error in the proceedings below.
Appellant was convicted of two counts of aggravated murder and sentenced to death. Appellant later filed a motion for leave to file a motion for a new trial, claiming that the prosecution violated Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963). In a second filing, Appellant both submitted a successive petition for postconviction relief and moved for a new trial. The trial court denied all relief. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) the trial court correctly dismissed Appellant's successive postconviction petition for lack of subject matter jurisdiction; and (2) Appellant's failure to meet his burden under Ohio Rev. Code 2953.23(A)(1)(b) required denial of Appellant's motion for leave to file a motion for a new trial.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.