Home/Ohio Supreme Court/State v. Roe

State v. Roe

802 N.E.2d 1123, 101 Ohio St. 3d 1448
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided February 2, 2004·No. 1987-1879·Published

Opinion

Franklin App. No. 86AP-59. Upon consideration of appellant’s motion for expedited stay of death sentence, appellant’s motion to supplement motion for expedited stay of death sentence, and appellant’s pro se motion for stay of death sentence,

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

F.E. Sweeney and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., dissent.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that the motions for stay of death sentence be, and hereby are, denied.

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

State v. Roe, 802 N.E.2d 1123, 101 Ohio St. 3d 1448 (Ohio 2004).

802 N.E.2d 1123 (State v. Roe) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.