State v. Siferd

Ohio Supreme Court

State v. Siferd

789 N.E.2d 237, 99 Ohio St. 3d 145

Ohio Supreme Court·Decided June 11, 2003·No. No. 2003-0106·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

{¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals on Proposition of Law No. X is affirmed on the authority of State v. Fisher, 99 Ohio St.3d 127, 2003-Ohio-2761, 789 N.E.2d 222.

Robert A. Fry, Hancock County Prosecuting Attorney, and Mark C. Miller, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. David H. Bodiker, Ohio Public Defender, Angie Greene and Jerry McHenry, Assistant Public Defenders, for appellant. Moyer, C.J., Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton and O’Con-nor, JJ., concur. Cook, J., not participating.

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

{¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals on Proposition of Law No. X is affirmed on the authority of State v. Fisher, 99 Ohio St.3d 127, 2003-Ohio-2761, 789 N.E.2d 222.

Robert A. Fry, Hancock County Prosecuting Attorney, and Mark C. Miller, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. David H. Bodiker, Ohio Public Defender, Angie Greene and Jerry McHenry, Assistant Public Defenders, for appellant. Moyer, C.J., Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton and O’Con-nor, JJ., concur. Cook, J., not participating.

State v. Siferd, 789 N.E.2d 237, 99 Ohio St. 3d 145 (Ohio 2003).

Pincite

789 N.E.2d 237 (State v. Siferd) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related