State v. Reiner

Ohio Supreme Court

State v. Reiner

711 N.E.2d 1011, 86 Ohio St. 3d 1417, 1999 Ohio LEXIS 2247

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedJune 30, 1999

Docket99-427

StatusPublished

This text of 711 N.E.2d 1011 (State v. Reiner) 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. Reiner, 711 N.E.2d 1011, 86 Ohio St. 3d 1417, 1999 Ohio LEXIS 2247 (Ohio 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

Lucas App. No. L-97-1002. On review of order certifying a conflict. The court determines that a conflict exists; the parties are to brief the issue stated in the court of appeals’ entry journalized February 9,1999, at page 3:

“In State v. Thomas ([July 26], 1995), Athens App. No. [94]CA1608, unreported [1995 WL 468183], inquiry was made of a juror as to whether exposure to extraneous information or improper outside influence affected the juror’s impartiality. The juror’s response appeal’s to have partially served as a reason for concluding a lack of prejudice from juror misconduct. We must conclude that, at least tacitly, the Thomas court found permissible a practice we have held to be improper. Accordingly, we find a conflict between this decision and our own and do so certify.

“The issue submitted is whether Evid.R. 606(B) permits, under any circumstances, inquiry for a juror as to the effect of extraneous information or improper outside influence upon his or her decision making process.”

Resnick, J., not participating. Sua sponte, cause consolidated with 99-239, infra. Resnick, J., not participating.

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

Lucas App. No. L-97-1002. On review of order certifying a conflict. The court determines that a conflict exists; the parties are to brief the issue stated in the court of appeals’ entry journalized February 9,1999, at page 3:

“In State v. Thomas ([July 26], 1995), Athens App. No. [94]CA1608, unreported [1995 WL 468183], inquiry was made of a juror as to whether exposure to extraneous information or improper outside influence affected the juror’s impartiality. The juror’s response appeal’s to have partially served as a reason for concluding a lack of prejudice from juror misconduct. We must conclude that, at least tacitly, the Thomas court found permissible a practice we have held to be improper. Accordingly, we find a conflict between this decision and our own and do so certify.

“The issue submitted is whether Evid.R. 606(B) permits, under any circumstances, inquiry for a juror as to the effect of extraneous information or improper outside influence upon his or her decision making process.”

Resnick, J., not participating. Sua sponte, cause consolidated with 99-239, infra. Resnick, J., not participating.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

711 N.E.2d 1011, 86 Ohio St. 3d 1417, 1999 Ohio LEXIS 2247, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-reiner-ohio-1999.