State v. Pierce

118 Ohio St. 3d 1212
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Pierce. Read the opinion of the Court — 117 Ohio St. 3d 1225
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided June 11, 2008·No. No. 2007-1605·Published

Opinion

{¶ 1} Appellant has filed a motion for reconsideration of the court’s order dismissing appellant’s appeal as having been improvidently accepted.

{¶ 2} The motion for reconsideration is granted to the following extent: The order in this cause filed on April 2, 2008, dismissing the appeal as having been improvidently accepted, reported at 117 Ohio St.3d 1225, 2008-Ohio-1428, 884 N.E.2d 603, is vacated with respect to appellant’s Proposition of Law No. III. Jurisdiction is retained over this cause as to Proposition of Law No. Ill, the cause is held for the decision in case No. 2007-1427, State v. Ferguson, Cuyahoga App. No. 88450, 2007-Ohio-2777, 2007 WL 1644449, and the briefing schedule is stayed.

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

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

State v. Pierce, 118 Ohio St. 3d 1212 (Ohio 2008).

118 Ohio St. 3d 1212 (State v. Pierce) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Ferguson, 88450 (6-7-2007)
2007 Ohio 2777 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2007)
State v. Pierce
117 Ohio St. 3d 1225 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2008)