State v. Ortiz

Ohio Supreme Court

State v. Ortiz

925 N.E.2d 138, 124 Ohio St. 3d 562

Ohio Supreme Court·Decided April 7, 2010·No. No. 2009-1925·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

{¶ 1} The discretionary appeal is accepted.

{¶ 2} The judgment of the court of appeals holding that the felonious-assault counts were allied offenses of similar import committed with a single animus and that the attempted-murder and felonious-assault counts were allied offenses of similar import committed with a single animus is reversed on the authority of State v. Williams, 124 Ohio St.3d 381, 2010-Ohio-147, 922 N.E.2d 937. The judgment of the trial court is reinstated.

Moyer, C.J.,¹ and Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor, O’Donnell, and Cupp, JJ., concur. William D. Mason, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and Kristen L. Sobieski, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellant. Pfeifer and Lanzinger, JJ., dissent and would affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.

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

{¶ 1} The discretionary appeal is accepted.

{¶ 2} The judgment of the court of appeals holding that the felonious-assault counts were allied offenses of similar import committed with a single animus and that the attempted-murder and felonious-assault counts were allied offenses of similar import committed with a single animus is reversed on the authority of State v. Williams, 124 Ohio St.3d 381, 2010-Ohio-147, 922 N.E.2d 937. The judgment of the trial court is reinstated.

Moyer, C.J.,¹ and Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor, O’Donnell, and Cupp, JJ., concur. William D. Mason, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and Kristen L. Sobieski, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellant. Pfeifer and Lanzinger, JJ., dissent and would affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.

State v. Ortiz, 925 N.E.2d 138, 124 Ohio St. 3d 562 (Ohio 2010).

Pincite

925 N.E.2d 138 (State v. Ortiz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related