State v. Colbert

Ohio Supreme Court

State v. Colbert

792 N.E.2d 196, 99 Ohio St. 3d 1508

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Colbert. Read the opinion of the Court — 99 Ohio St. 3d 1441 →

Ohio Supreme Court·Decided July 30, 2003·No. 2003- 0033·Published

Opinion

Cuyahoga App. No. 80361, 2002-0hio-6315. On motion to dismiss the state of Ohio’s appeal. Motion denied.

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

On motion for reconsideration of the dismissal of the cross-appeal. Motion granted and cross-appeal allowed on Proposition of Law No. I only.

Moyer, C.J., Resnick and Pfeifer, JJ., concur but would also allow all other propositions of law. F.E. Sweeney and O’Donnell, JJ., dissent and would deny. O’Connor, J., dissents and would deny as moot.

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

Cuyahoga App. No. 80361, 2002-0hio-6315. On motion to dismiss the state of Ohio’s appeal. Motion denied.

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

On motion for reconsideration of the dismissal of the cross-appeal. Motion granted and cross-appeal allowed on Proposition of Law No. I only.

Moyer, C.J., Resnick and Pfeifer, JJ., concur but would also allow all other propositions of law. F.E. Sweeney and O’Donnell, JJ., dissent and would deny. O’Connor, J., dissents and would deny as moot.

State v. Colbert, 792 N.E.2d 196, 99 Ohio St. 3d 1508 (Ohio 2003).

Pincite

792 N.E.2d 196 (State v. Colbert) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.