State v. Spisak

Ohio Supreme Court

State v. Spisak

940 N.E.2d 576, 127 Ohio St. 3d 1526

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedJanuary 27, 2011

Docket1986-1099

StatusPublished

This text of 940 N.E.2d 576 (State v. Spisak) 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. Spisak, 940 N.E.2d 576, 127 Ohio St. 3d 1526 (Ohio 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

Cuyahoga App. Nos. 47458 and 47459. By entry filed May 12, 2010, this court ordered that appellant’s sentence be carried into execution on Thursday, February 17, 2011.

In order to facilitate this court’s timely consideration of any matters relating to the execution of appellant’s sentence, it is ordered by the court that the Chief Justice may suspend application of any provisions of the Rules of Practice of the Supreme Court, including, but not limited to, the filing requirements imposed by S.Ct.Prac.R. 14.1.

It is further ordered that service of documents as required by S.Ct.Prac.R. 14.2, shall be personal, [1527]*1527by facsimile transmission, or by email.

It is further ordered that counsel of record for the parties shall provide this court with a copy of any document relating to this matter that is filed in, or issued by, any other court in this state or any federal court, as well as any commutation, pardon, or warrant of reprieve issued by the governor. A copy of the document shall be delivered to the Office of the Clerk as soon as possible, either personally, by facsimile transmission, or by email.

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

Cuyahoga App. Nos. 47458 and 47459. By entry filed May 12, 2010, this court ordered that appellant’s sentence be carried into execution on Thursday, February 17, 2011.

In order to facilitate this court’s timely consideration of any matters relating to the execution of appellant’s sentence, it is ordered by the court that the Chief Justice may suspend application of any provisions of the Rules of Practice of the Supreme Court, including, but not limited to, the filing requirements imposed by S.Ct.Prac.R. 14.1.

It is further ordered that service of documents as required by S.Ct.Prac.R. 14.2, shall be personal, [1527]*1527by facsimile transmission, or by email.

It is further ordered that counsel of record for the parties shall provide this court with a copy of any document relating to this matter that is filed in, or issued by, any other court in this state or any federal court, as well as any commutation, pardon, or warrant of reprieve issued by the governor. A copy of the document shall be delivered to the Office of the Clerk as soon as possible, either personally, by facsimile transmission, or by email.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

940 N.E.2d 576, 127 Ohio St. 3d 1526, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-spisak-ohio-2011.