State v. Campbell

783 N.E.2d 519, 98 Ohio St. 3d 1459
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Campbell. Read the opinion of the Court — 100 Ohio St. 3d 361
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided February 19, 2003·No. 2003-0045·Published

Opinion

Hamilton App. No. C-010727, 2002-Ohio-6064. On review of order certifying a conflict. The court determines that a conflict exists. The parties are to brief the issue stated in the court of appeals’ Entry Granting Motion to Certify Conflict dated December 9, 2002:

“Whether the amendment of the charging instrument from one subsection of R.C. 4511.19 to another subsection of R.C. 4511.19 changes the name and identify of the crime charged in violation of Ohio Criminal Rule 7(D)?”

F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and O’Connor, JJ., dissent.

The conflict case in State v. Marinik (1989), 57 Ohio App.3d 110, 567 N.E.2d 310.

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

State v. Campbell, 783 N.E.2d 519, 98 Ohio St. 3d 1459 (Ohio 2003).

783 N.E.2d 519 (State v. Campbell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Marinik
567 N.E.2d 310 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1989)