State v. Raglin

Ohio Supreme Court

State v. Raglin

674 N.E.2d 1173, 77 Ohio St. 3d 1531, 1997 Ohio LEXIS 3655

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedJanuary 24, 1997

Docket97-141 and 96-2872

StatusPublished

This text of 674 N.E.2d 1173 (State v. Raglin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Raglin, 674 N.E.2d 1173, 77 Ohio St. 3d 1531, 1997 Ohio LEXIS 3655 (Ohio 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

This cause is pending before the court as an appeal from the Court of Common Pleas of Hamilton County, Supreme Court case No. 96-2872, and as an appeal from the Court of Appeals for Hamilton County, Supreme Court case No. 97-141. Upon consideration of appellant’s motion to consolidate case Nos. 97-141 and 96-2872,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion to consolidate be, and hereby is, granted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that the parties shall combine the briefing of case Nos. 97-141 and 96-2872 and file one brief for each brief permitted under S.CtPrac.R. XIX(5). The parties shall file an original of each brief in case No. 97-141 and in case No. 96-2872 and a total of eighteen copies. The parties shall otherwise comply with the provisions of S.CtPrac.R. XIX and any other applicable Rules of Practice.

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

This cause is pending before the court as an appeal from the Court of Common Pleas of Hamilton County, Supreme Court case No. 96-2872, and as an appeal from the Court of Appeals for Hamilton County, Supreme Court case No. 97-141. Upon consideration of appellant’s motion to consolidate case Nos. 97-141 and 96-2872,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion to consolidate be, and hereby is, granted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that the parties shall combine the briefing of case Nos. 97-141 and 96-2872 and file one brief for each brief permitted under S.CtPrac.R. XIX(5). The parties shall file an original of each brief in case No. 97-141 and in case No. 96-2872 and a total of eighteen copies. The parties shall otherwise comply with the provisions of S.CtPrac.R. XIX and any other applicable Rules of Practice.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

674 N.E.2d 1173, 77 Ohio St. 3d 1531, 1997 Ohio LEXIS 3655, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-raglin-ohio-1997.