In re Mills

Ohio Supreme Court

In re Mills

780 N.E.2d 281, 97 Ohio St. 3d 432

Ohio Supreme Court·Decided December 13, 2002·No. No. 2002-1367·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

{¶ 1} The discretionary appeal is allowed.

{¶2} The judgment of the court of appeals is reversed, and the cause is remanded to the trial court on the authority of In re Cross, 96 Ohio St.3d 328, 2002-Ohio-4183, 774 N.E.2d 258.

David H. Bodiker, Ohio Public Defender, and Felice Harris, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant. Thomas L. Sartini, Ashtabula County Prosecuting Attorney, and John N. Zomoida Jr., Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. Moyer, C.J., Douglas, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur. Resnick, J., dissents.

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

{¶ 1} The discretionary appeal is allowed.

{¶2} The judgment of the court of appeals is reversed, and the cause is remanded to the trial court on the authority of In re Cross, 96 Ohio St.3d 328, 2002-Ohio-4183, 774 N.E.2d 258.

David H. Bodiker, Ohio Public Defender, and Felice Harris, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant. Thomas L. Sartini, Ashtabula County Prosecuting Attorney, and John N. Zomoida Jr., Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. Moyer, C.J., Douglas, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur. Resnick, J., dissents.

In re Mills, 780 N.E.2d 281, 97 Ohio St. 3d 432 (Ohio 2002).

Pincite

780 N.E.2d 281 (In re Mills) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related