State v. Overton

Ohio Supreme Court

State v. Overton

2011 Ohio 740, 128 Ohio St. 3d 353

Ohio Supreme Court·Decided February 22, 2011·No. 2010-2072·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

{¶ 1} The discretionary appeal is accepted on Proposition of Law No. II.

{¶ 2} The portion of the judgment of the court of appeals addressing appellant’s eighth assignment of error below is vacated on the authority of State v. Johnson, 128 Ohio St.3d 153, 2010-Ohio-6314, 942 N.E.2d 1061, and the cause is remanded to the court of appeals for application of our decision in State v. Johnson.

O’Connor, C.J., and Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Donnell, Lanzinger, Cupp, and McGee Brown, JJ., concur.

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

{¶ 1} The discretionary appeal is accepted on Proposition of Law No. II.

{¶ 2} The portion of the judgment of the court of appeals addressing appellant’s eighth assignment of error below is vacated on the authority of State v. Johnson, 128 Ohio St.3d 153, 2010-Ohio-6314, 942 N.E.2d 1061, and the cause is remanded to the court of appeals for application of our decision in State v. Johnson.

O’Connor, C.J., and Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Donnell, Lanzinger, Cupp, and McGee Brown, JJ., concur.

State v. Overton, 2011 Ohio 740, 128 Ohio St. 3d 353 (Ohio 2011).

Pincite

2011 Ohio 740 (State v. Overton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related