State v. Arrington

207 N.E.2d 557, 2 Ohio St. 2d 172, 31 Ohio Op. 2d 322, 1965 Ohio LEXIS 517
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided May 19, 1965·No. No. 39108·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinions

Per Curiam.

Defendant contends that his constitutional rights have been invaded by permitting the confessions to be introduced in evidence and considered by the jury, and that the prosecutor was in error in not notifying defendant’s counsel of the proposed interrogation.

[173]*173The record discloses that defendant songht the interviews at which the confessions were voluntarily made; that he did not request counsel at the time; and that he was not refused the assistance of counsel.

The judgment of the Court of Appeals is affirmed on authority of State v. McLeod, 1 Ohio St. 2d 60.

Judgment affirmed.

Taft, C. J., Zimmermah, Matthias, Herbert, Sohheider and BrowN, JJ., concur.

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

State v. Arrington, 207 N.E.2d 557, 2 Ohio St. 2d 172, 31 Ohio Op. 2d 322, 1965 Ohio LEXIS 517 (Ohio 1965).

207 N.E.2d 557 (State v. Arrington) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Commonwealth v. Price
52 Pa. D. & C.2d 207 (Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, 1971)
State v. Arrington
209 N.E.2d 207 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1965)