State v. Satterfield

Ohio Supreme Court

State v. Satterfield

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

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedMarch 4, 2010

Docket2008-1424

StatusPublished

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

Pincite

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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2010 Ohio 725, 923 N.E.2d 612, 124 Ohio St. 3d 474, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-satterfield-ohio-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack