State v. Satterfield

Ohio Supreme Court

State v. Satterfield

2010 Ohio 725, 923 N.E.2d 612, 124 Ohio St. 3d 474

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Satterfield. Read the opinion of the Court — 119 Ohio St. 3d 1502 →

Ohio Supreme Court·Decided March 4, 2010·No. 2008-1424·Published

Opinion

{¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is reversed as to the court of appeals’ holding on the retrospective application of H.B. 137 on the authority of State v. Singleton, 124 Ohio St.3d 173, 2009-Ohio-6434, 920 N.E.2d 958. R.C. 2929.191 may not be applied to a sentence entered prior to July 11, 2006.

Moyer, C.J., and Pfeifer, O’Connor, O’Donnell, and Cupp, JJ., concur. Lundberg Stratton and Lanzinger, JJ., dissent for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion of Lanzinger, J., in State v. Singleton.

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

{¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is reversed as to the court of appeals’ holding on the retrospective application of H.B. 137 on the authority of State v. Singleton, 124 Ohio St.3d 173, 2009-Ohio-6434, 920 N.E.2d 958. R.C. 2929.191 may not be applied to a sentence entered prior to July 11, 2006.

Moyer, C.J., and Pfeifer, O’Connor, O’Donnell, and Cupp, JJ., concur. Lundberg Stratton and Lanzinger, JJ., dissent for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion of Lanzinger, J., in State v. Singleton.

State v. Satterfield, 2010 Ohio 725, 923 N.E.2d 612, 124 Ohio St. 3d 474 (Ohio 2010).

Pincite

2010 Ohio 725 (State v. Satterfield) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related