In Re A.W.

Ohio Supreme Court

In Re A.W.

2016 Ohio 5455, 60 N.E.3d 1264, 147 Ohio St. 3d 110

Ohio Supreme Court·Decided August 23, 2016·No. 2015-1645·Published

Opinion

(¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed as to the holdings regarding double jeopardy and' due process on the authority of In re D.S., 146 Ohio St.3d 182, 2016-Ohio-1027, 54 N.E.3d 1184.

{¶ 2} The remainder of the appeal is dismissed as having been improvidently accepted.

O’Connor, C.J., and O’Donnell, Kennedy, and French, JJ., concur. Pfeifer, Lanzinger, and O’Neill, JJ., dissent for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion in In re D.S. and would order briefing on the issues raised in the remainder of the appeal. *111 Timothy Young, Ohio Public Defender, and Charlyn Bohland, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant, A.W.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

(¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed as to the holdings regarding double jeopardy and' due process on the authority of In re D.S., 146 Ohio St.3d 182, 2016-Ohio-1027, 54 N.E.3d 1184.

{¶ 2} The remainder of the appeal is dismissed as having been improvidently accepted.

O’Connor, C.J., and O’Donnell, Kennedy, and French, JJ., concur. Pfeifer, Lanzinger, and O’Neill, JJ., dissent for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion in In re D.S. and would order briefing on the issues raised in the remainder of the appeal. *111 Timothy Young, Ohio Public Defender, and Charlyn Bohland, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant, A.W.

In Re A.W., 2016 Ohio 5455, 60 N.E.3d 1264, 147 Ohio St. 3d 110 (Ohio 2016).

Pincite

2016 Ohio 5455 (In Re A.W.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related